| About Ange | Contact | Products | Maritime Consultancy | IT Consultancy | People |
Yard Analytics - To follow and understand Yard Performance
New and intelligent performance KPIs
Beside the well known MPH - Moves per Hour KPI, Yard analytics analyses every move, every block layout, every stowage plan and every prime movers operation and delays. After analysis, it creates simple indicators that can help management identify areas that requires correction. The new KPI include:- The vessel call performance which is a number between 0 and 100 that indicates how well the call went. The stowage plan is analyzed, the longest crane is determined, the crane delays are added together and compared to a median. Values below 70 indicates issue for the vessel call. The advantage of this KPI compared to the MPH is that it can report on the inadequacy of the stowage that was caused by the liners.
- The Yard congestion factor for each vessel call reports how many percent of all the load moves that were delayed because of yard congestion. Values above 15% indicates that the yard should be reconfigured and that services are clashing with each others.
- The overall Yard block performance KPI reports the average age of each unit on a yard block and what percentage of the moves are delayed because of cross service congestions.
- The PM performance reports the overall trucking performance, the average cycle time for load, discharge and house move as well as the lost productivity at shift changes.
- The RTG performance reports similar information as the PM reports but also measures the amount of intra and interblock gantrying as well as its productivity costs.
Historical data
Yard Analytics uses the Navis’ Sparc and Express data and builds vessel call, PM, RTG and Yard block performance information that are presented into Web pages or PDF files. This information is stored for ever. You can always click on the Call Id (below in blue) to review how a vessel call, months ago, went.
Graph and trends
The information is also available in graph forms letting the user determine how the performance of a particular service progressed:|
The amount of load and discharge for the last year (1 sample per week for this service). Blue is load, red is discharge. |
|
|---|
|
The number of load moves, in %, that were delayed by block congestion on the yard. In this case, the congestion is in general limited but was better for a set of calls. |
|---|
|
The overall Operational KPI derived for all crane operations, delays, stowage plan and longest crane shows that performance was degraded a while ago but has now been corrected. |
|
|---|
...And even more graphs gives a perspective of how it went so far.
Vessel Call Diagnostics
Yard Analytics allows the operation manager to see how a vessel call went. Few indicators tell him/her if more time should be invested into its analysis. The first set of indicators are pretty normal:
Beside the usual information, you will notice that the distance per move for the load and discharge operations are reported. For this call, the load cycle was 609 meters per move to load compared to 883 for discharge. Yard analytics reports more in its second level of performance data:
The longest crane had 193 cycles (twin units count as a cycle). Based on the stowage plan, 2.9 cranes should have been allocated for the best performance. In this case, 2 cranes were deployed (Q17 for 18.8 hours and Q18 for 19.3 hours). Based on the optimal and actual crane deployment, the call achieved a KPI or 35 and 50 which is poor. Load moves took an average of 3 minutes (183 seconds) which is poor considering that the driving distance was well optimized for the load operation. The total amount of minutes above a provision of 2 minutes per load (configurable value) showed that 617 minutes were lost. We can conclude from the above that the load cycle was the caused of poor performance.
What went wrong....
Looking further down in the report, Yard Analytics reports the areas of concerns.
The vessel was discharged to several blocks. The most active discharge location was block 14G with 30 moves. This is not excessive.
The load operations was concentrated into 4 blocks (the last 4 in the “Load Source Block” above).
Yard analytics reports that block 07F was particularly congested with 137 moves. It also reports that services causing congestions are KIAT (with 90 moves), CESE, etc.
Finally, it reported that 15.5% of the moves were impacted by congestion.
The user may examine the RTG operation in details. In this case, the detail RTG movements and operation is displayed. It can help the vessel planner figuring out why the block was a poor performer.
Here is an example of a detailed RTG log, it shows that the last 4 hours of operation on block 07F was impacted by the load cycle of the service SPI and the discharge cycle of CESE:
There is more....
The cranesplit and crane operation analysis shows the gain in allocation and deallocation of cranes.
The crane operation for each bay and their gantrying as well as the pauses are clearly indicated. Yard Analytics also shows that if 3 cranes had been allocated, the operation should have completed at 23:00. With 2 cranes, it should have completed by 02:00. With 1 crane, it would have been at 11 AM.
And even more....
The wait time per move for each PM is indicated as well as the number of PM that were deployed per crane for the discharge and load cycles. The blocks causing delays are also displayed in small.
The above can be rather complex to understand but a set of patterns help the user in understanding the issue. For example, low transit time + low PM count means not enough load blocks. A pre-defined set of 8 patterns can guide the user in understanding most PM/QC issues.
