PIANC

‘Setting the Course’

Report n° 135 - 2014

DESIGN PRINCIPLES FOR SMALL AND

MEDIUM MARINE CONTAINER TERMINALS

The World Association for Waterborne Transport Infrastructure

 PIANC
PIANC REPORT N° 135
MARITIME NAVIGATION COMMISSION

DESIGN PRINCIPLES
FOR SMALL AND MEDIUM MARINE
CONTAINER TERMINALS
2014
PIANC has Technical Commissions concerned with inland waterways and ports (InCom),
coastal and ocean waterways (including ports and harbours) (MarCom), environmental
aspects (EnviCom) and sport and pleasure navigation (RecCom).

This report has been produced by an international Working Group convened by the
Maritime Navigation Commission (MarCom). Members of the Working Group represent
several countries and are acknowledged experts in their profession.

The objective of this report is to provide information and recommendations on good

practice. Conformity is not obligatory and engineering judgement should be used in its
application, especially in special circumstances. This report should be seen as an expert
guidance and state of the art on this particular subject. PIANC is not a certifying body and
disclaims all responsibility in case this report should be presented as an official standard
and/or as a certification.

PIANC Secrétariat Général

Boulevard du Roi Albert II 20, B 3
B-1000 Bruxelles
Belgique

http://www.pianc.org

VAT BE 408-287-945

ISBN 978-2-87223-213-0

© All rights reserved

 GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Term Description
AEIS Automatic Equipment Identification System
AGV Automated Guided Vehicle
ALV Automated Lifting Vehicle
ALWC Accelerated Low Water Corrosion
AMP Alternative Marine Power
ARTC Australian Rail Track Corporation Limited
ASC Automated Stacking Crane
BATNEEC Best Available Technology Not Entailing Excessive Cost
B Beam
BOOT Build Operate Own and Transfer
BOT Build Operate and Transfer
BS British Standards

CBM Cement Bound Material

CBP Concrete Block Paving
CBR Californian Bearing Ratio
CSI Container Security Initiative
CCTV Closed Circuit Television
CFS Container Freight Station
D Depth
DWT Dead Weight Tonnage
EC European Commission
ECH Empty Container Handler
EDI Electronic Data Interchange
ECMT European Conference of Ministers of Transport
EU European Union
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EMP Environmental Management Plan
EMS Environmental Management System
FCL Full Container Load
FLT Fork Lift Truck
Ft Feet
GDP Gross Domestic Product
HV High Voltage
Hz Hertz
IAPH International Association of Ports and Harbours
ILO International Labour Organisation
IMDG International Maritime Code for Dangerous Goods
ISO International Standards Organisation
ISPS International Ship and Port Facility Security Code
IT Information Technology
kV Kilo Volts
kN Kilo Newtons
kM Kilometres
LAT Lowest Astronomical Tide
LBP Length Between Perpendiculars

1
Term Description
LCL Less than Container Load
LCV Longer Combination Vehicles
LLPC Level-Luffing Portal Crane
LOA Length Over All
LOT Lease Operate Transfer
LCM Life Cycle Management
LV Low Voltage
M Metres
MARPOL International Convention for Prevention of Pollution at Sea
MHC Mobile Harbour Crane
MLWS Mean Low Water Spring
MLLW Mean Lower Low Water
MT Empty (Container)
NAVFAC Naval Facilities Engineering Command
OBC Overhead Bridge Crane
OOG Out-of-Gauge
PIANC Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses
(Now: The World Association for Waterborne Transport Infrastructure)
PVC Poly Vinyl Chloride
RDT Radio Data Transmission
RMG Rail Mounted Gantry Crane
Ro Ro Roll on-Roll off
RMQC Rail Mounted Quay Crane
RS Reach Stacker
RTG Rubber Tired Gantry Crane
SC Straddle Carrier
ShC Shuttle Carrier
SOLAS Safety of Life at Sea
SP Side Pick
STS Ship-to-Shore
t Tonnes
TEU Twenty foot Equivalent Unit, 1 container of twenty feet in length
TGS Twenty Foot Ground Slots
TOR Terms of Reference
TOS Terminal Operating System
TT Terminal Tractor
TTU Tractor Trailer Unit
UHMT Ultra High Molecular Weight
ULCV Ultimate Large Container Vessel
UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
UN/EDIFACT United Nations/Electronic Data Interface for Administration, Commerce and Transport

UV Ultra Violet
USA United States of America
US$ United States Dollars
VLCC Very Large Container Carrier
V Volts
WG Working Group
WLC Whole Life Costs
WSG Wide Span Gantry

2
CONTENTS PAGE

1. INTRODUCTION 6
1.1. Summary of Terms of Reference and Purpose of This Report 7
1.2. List of Working Group Members 7
1.3. Report Layout 8
1.4. Background and Overview of Containerisation 8
1.4.1. Development of Container Vessels 8
1.4.2. Type and Size of Containers 9
1.4.3. Type and Size of Design Vessels 10

2. TERMINAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 14

2.1. Introduction 14
2.2. Location of the Terminal, Port and City Relationships and Environmental and
Safety Aspects 15
2.2.1. General Principles 15
2.2.2. Container Terminals and City Relationships 16
2.2.3. Environmental and Safety Aspects 16
2.3. Site Conditions 18
2.4. Traffic and Vessel Forecast 19
2.4.1. Traffic Forecasting 19
2.4.2. Vessel Forecasting 19
2.5. Marine Access 20
2.6. Hinterland Connections 21
2.7. Terminal Dimensions 23
2.7.1. Berth Geometric Characteristics 23
2.7.2. Berth Capacity/Occupancy 24
2.7.3. Stacking Area 25
2.8. Terminal Management Models 25
2.9. Stakeholder Analysis 25
2.9.1. Purpose of a Stakeholder Analysis 25
2.9.2. Identification of Stakeholders 26
2.9.3. A Stakeholder Schedule 26
2.9.4. Attitudes of the Stakeholders 27
2.9.5. Strategy Development 27
2.10. Economic Considerations 27
2.10.1. Phasing 27
2.10.2. Financial and Economic Aspects 28

3. TERMINAL OPERATIONS 29
3.1. Introduction 29
3.2. Operational Areas 29
3.2.1. Introduction 29
3.2.2. Apron 31
3.2.3. Yard 31
3.2.4. Landside Facilities 33
3.2.5. Terminal Depth 34
3.3. Terminal Handling Systems 34
3.3.1. Introduction 34
3.4. Types of Equipment 34
3.4.1. Ship-to-Shore Operations 43
3.4.2. Stacking Operations 47
3.4.3. Horizontal Transfer Operations 52
3.4.4. Rail Terminal Operations 55
3.4.5. System Combinations 57
3
 3.4.6. Typical Ratios of Handling Equipment 58
3.5. Space Requirements 58
3.5.1. Berth Capacity 58
3.5.2. Apron Width 60
3.5.3. Container Yard 62
3.5.4. Reefer Stacks 74
3.5.5. Security and Customs Facilities 74
3.5.6. Gate 74
3.5.7. Rail Yard 77
3.6. Buildings and Ancillary Facilities 80
3.6.1. Introduction 80
3.6.2. Administration/Operations Building 80
3.6.3. Canteen and Amenities 81
3.6.4. Maintenance Facilities 81
3.6.5. Handling of Leaking and Hazardous Containers 81
3.6.6. Customs/Agricultural Inspection Facilities 82
3.6.7. CFS Facilities 82
3.6.8. Other Facilities 83
3.7. Terminal Operating System 83
3.7.1. Functions 83
3.7.2. Gate to Quay Operations 84
3.7.3. Labour and Equipment Resources 84
3.7.4. Terminal Tractor Utilisation 84
3.7.5. Quayside crane utilisation 85
3.7.6. Hazardous goods 85
3.7.7. Reefer monitoring 85
3.7.8. TOS reports 85
3.7.9. Managing Terminal Business Transactions 85
3.7.10. Finance and Accounting Systems 86
3.7.11. Information via the Web 86

4. CIVIL WORKS DESIGN ASPECTS 87

4.1. Introduction 87
4.2. Design Life 87
4.3. Quay Structure 88
4.3.1. Design considerations 90
4.3.2. Quay Furniture 93
4.4. Quay Apron 93
4.4.1. Cope 94
4.4.2. Rear Crane Rail Beam 94
4.4.3. STS Crane Rails 94
4.4.4. Crane Cable Slot 95
4.4.5. Crane Cable Connection Pits 95
4.4.6. Crane Buffers 96
4.4.7. Crane Storm Tie Downs and Anchor Slots 96
4.4.8. Utilities 96
4.5. Yard Area 97
4.5.1. Yard Pavement 97
4.5.2. Rail Yard 100
4.6. Buildings and Ancillary Facilities 101
4.6.1. General 101
4.6.2. Gate Facilities 101
4.6.3. Fuelling facilities 102
4.6.4. Quayside offices and facilities 102
4.6.5. Equipment Washing Area 103

4
 4.6.6. Tool Storage and Fire Truck 103
4.6.7. Terminal Power Supply Sub-Station 103
4.6.8. Terminal Workshop 104
4.7. Utilities 104
4.7.1. Water supply 104
4.7.2. Storm Water Drainage 105
4.7.3. Sewage Treatment and Disposal 106
4.7.4. Electricity Supply 107
4.7.5. Electrical Power Requirements 107
4.7.6. Lighting 108
4.7.7. Communications Networks 109
4.7.8. Fuel Bunkering 109
4.8. Security and Safety Issues 110
4.8.1. Security 110
4.8.2. Safety Issues 113
4.8.3. Reception facilities 114
4.8.4. Control Rooms 114
4.8.5. Grids 114

5. MAINTENANCE 115
5.1. Maintenance Strategy 115
5.2. Responsibility for Maintenance 115
5.3. Maintenance Facilities 116
5.4. Spares 117
5.5. Management Information 118
5.6. Maintenance Personnel 118
5.7. Equipment 119
5.8. Infrastructure 120
5.9. Planning and Design Optimisation of the Infrastructure to Reduce Future
Maintenance Costs 120
5.9.1. Pavements 120
5.9.2. Steelwork 120
5.9.3. Utilities 121
5.9.4. Fender Systems 122
5.9.5. Bollards 123
5.10. Maintenance Management 123
5.10.1. General 123
5.10.2. Operational Records 124
5.10.3. Maintenance Costing 124
5.10.4. Operation and Maintenance Cost Planning 124
5.10.5. Operation and Maintenance Performance Reviews 124
5.10.6. Structures and Facilities 124

6. REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING 125

7. APPENDICES 127

5
1. INTRODUCTION

70 % of the world is covered by water, 80 % of the world’s population live near water and 90 % of all
world trade is carried by water. A significant and growing part of this world trade is now carried by
containers. PIANC Working Group 135 was set up in 2009 to address the issues relevant to the
planning, design and operation of small and medium size container terminals. A number of earlier
publications have addressed similar issues of general port planning in the past: for example, the 1978
UNCTAD Guidelines for Port Development and more recently the 2001 IAPH Guidelines for port
planning and design.
This present report concentrates specifically on small and medium size container terminals and
attempts to introduce current best practices and recommendations for ports and terminal operators
setting up and developing new modern container handling facilities and includes but is not limited to the
following:
- The latest design criteria for quay construction and container yard pavements
- Current terminal layout planning
- The adaptability of terminals to service larger container vessels
- The difficulties faced in changing operational technology to facilitate growing traffic levels and to
improve performance
- Environmental issues related to terminal construction and operations
- Land shortage due to environmental or urban constraints
- The increasing tendency to use new transhipment operational technologies and equipment with the
resulting higher level and intensity of maintenance
- The development in the use of information technology
- New trends in the use of door-to-door logistics and inter-modal transportation
- The increased need for container terminal security such as ISPS Code compliance
The Working Group composition was balanced between consultants, port engineers with operational
experience, academics and information technology practitioners from a range of countries.
The first task that the group faced was to provide a definition of small and medium sized terminals and
for the purpose of the report a small terminal is deemed to handle less than 250,000 TEU per annum
and a medium terminal 250,000 to 750,000 TEU per annum. While this definition could be debated the
principles set out in the report still hold good for terminals of this size as well as for many larger
terminals.
In addition to the previous work of PIANC MarCom 9 – ‘Design of Modern Terminals’, a review of other
relevant literature and reports was undertaken including the 1978 UNCTAD ‘Port Development
Handbook’, the 2001 IAPH ‘Guidelines for Planning and Design’, the 2005 Agerschou et al. ‘Planning
for Design of Ports and Marine Terminals’, the 2008 Carl Thoresen ‘Port Design Handbook’ and the
work of MarCom WG 115 – ‘Guidelines for the (Un) Loading of Container Vessels’.
WG 135 met on a total of eight occasions over a period of three years from 2009 to 2012 and it is hoped
the report will prove to be of benefit to engineers, operators, terminal management and Port Authorities
alike.
The topics set out in the report are the general technical aspects that should be considered when
designing a container terminal. The terminal layouts provided in this report are indicative and should
not to be followed literally. Automated RMG layouts are unlikely to be implemented in small terminals
and in any case the equipment numbers will have to be based on a detailed study. The intent of the
provided sketches is just to show typical terminal layouts.
Detailed design and implementation of such facilities and infrastructure is significantly more complex
than stated in this report and it is highly recommended that experienced engineering professionals
should undertake out such work.

6
1.1. Summary of Terms of Reference and Purpose of This Report
The objective of the Working Group was to consider the design of new small and medium size container
terminals taking into account the main logistical trends concerning the handling of general cargo and
containers within port terminals over the past twenty years.
The Terms of Reference required the following aspects to be considered:
- Terminal planning considerations
- Concept terminal layouts
- Quay and yard design
- Main functions of terminal operations.
- The increased use of containers in inter-modal transport
- The effects of the increase in container vessel sizes
- Quayside and yard productivity
- Hazardous and heavy cargoes
- Developments in operations information systems
- Developments in container handling equipment
- Increased need for terminal security
- Equipment and infrastructure maintenance
- Environmental issues

1.2. List of Working Group Members

Member Company
George Steele (Chairman) URS
Birgitt Brinkmann (Vice-Chairman) University of Lueneberg
Peter Quist (Secretary) Witteveen+Bos consulting engineers/
Delft University of Technology
Simon Thomas Port Development Consultant
Dimitris Pachakis Royal HaskoningDHV
Sigurdur Gretarsson Siglingastofnun (Icelandic Maritime Administration)
Tobias Günzl INROS Lackner AG
Anthony Callens Port of Brussels
Carl Thoresen PortCat AS
Lionel Kaniewski Centre d'Etudes Techniques Maritimes et Fluviales
Mark Hill Royal HaskoningDHV
Peter Roome Sinclair Knight Merz
Steven Gray Moffatt & Nichol
Xavier Gesé Aperte Puertos del Estado
Laurence Emsley Collins Engineers, Inc.
Mr. S. Cork (Mentor from MarCom) HR Wallingford

7
The Working Group had the following meetings, often combined with a visit to a container terminal near
the meeting location:
- March 2009, London (United Kingdom)
- June 2009, Reykjavik (Iceland)
- December 2009, Hamburg (Germany)
- September 2010, Oslo (Norway)
- May 2011, Marseille (France)
- October 2011, Brussels (Belgium)
- March 2012, London (United Kingdom)
- October 2012, Barcelona (Spain)

1.3. Report Layout

Overall planning considerations are set out in Chapter 2 and include the potential location of a container
terminal with particular emphasis on city (if applicable), environmental and safety aspects. The chapter
also considers site investigation, vessel traffic forecasting, marine access, hinterland connections,
terminal dimensions and management models, stakeholder analysis and economic considerations.
In Chapter 3 the actual terminal operations are considered, including operational areas, terminal
handling systems, types of equipment, overall space requirements, buildings and ancillary facilities and
terminal operating systems.
Chapter 4 sets out the issues to be considered in respect of design life, quay structures, quay apron,
container yard area, buildings and ancillary facilities, general infrastructure, utilities, security and safety
issues.
The important area of maintenance, especially in respect of the terminal infrastructure is covered in
Chapter 5. This includes maintenance strategies, responsibilities, management information, facilities
and equipment, personnel, spares and the planning and design optimisation to reduce future
maintenance.
Finally, Chapter 6 covers references and suggested further reading.

1.4. Background and Overview of Containerisation

1.4.1. Development of Container Vessels

Container ships are cargo ships that carry their load in containers measured in Twenty-Foot Equivalent
Unit (TEU) ‘boxes’. The first generation of custom-built container ships appeared in the late 1960s.
These vessels had capacities of around 1,100 TEU and were used predominantly on the Atlantic and
Australian routes. They were typically less than 200 m in length with beams of around 25 m and drafts
of less than 9 m. They were rapidly followed by second-generation vessels in the 1970s and ‘80s, with
capacities of around 2,700 TEU, developed for the Far East-Europe run. These second-generation
vessels were typically 210-220 m in length with beams of 27 m and drafts of 10 m. A major constraint
on container vessel development in these early years was the need to keep within Panamax limits,
dictated by the dimensions of the Panama Canal locks, which effectively limited carrying capacity to
less than 4,000 TEU. This lasted until the advent of vessels of 4,000+ TEU, which were introduced in
the late 1980s. A higher carrying capacity was achieved by increasing the cell width below deck from
10 containers wide to 11 wide, while still remaining within the 294 m Panamax length and 32 m beam
requirement, but with increased drafts of 11.5 m.

8
This limit was exceeded by the American President Lines C-10 class vessel ‘President Truman’, which
was commissioned in 1988 with a container capacity of 4,300 TEU’s Vessels unable to transit the
Panama Canal became known as ‘Post-Panamax’ vessels. Through the 1990’s a new generation of
vessels evolved with capacities of over 6,000 TEU, typified by the Regina Maersk, delivered in 1996.
This vessel has a cell width of 17 containers on deck and 14 containers below, with a beam of 43 m
and draft of 14 m. Its length of 318 m makes it almost as long as a 250,000 DWT VLCC. Post-Panamax
vessels currently make up around 16 % of the world container fleet, but provide 45 % of the fleet
capacity.
The Panama Canal is currently constructing new locks, planned for completion in 2014/5 which will
triple the volume of cargo which can move through the Canal. The new locks will be capable of
accommodating vessels up to 366 m LOA with beams up to 49 m and drafts up to 15.2 m with a carrying
capacity of over 12,500 TEU’s. This class of vessel is defined as ‘New Panamax’.

Figure 1.1: New Panama Canal Locks

(Source: Panama Canal Authority, February 2011)

The largest class of container vessels in service at the time of preparation of this report are the ULCV
(Ultra Large Container Vessel, including the Maersk PS class (such as Emma Maersk), with a length of
397 m, a beam of 56.4 m, a draft of 15.5 m and a capacity of 15,500 TEU, and the CMA-CGM Great
Explorers class (such as Marco Polo), with a length of 394.4 m, a beam of 53.6 m, a draft of 16 m and
a capacity of 16,020 TEU. The Maersk Triple E class, which entered service in mid-2013, has a length
of 400 m, a beam of 59 m, a draft of 16 m, and a capacity of 18,000 TEU. All of these ships are well
over the limits of the ‘New Panamax’ class (shown in Fig 1.1 above) and the Maersk Triple E class is
also at the current limits of the Suez Canal, for which the term ‘Suezmax’ is sometimes used.

1.4.2. Type and Size of Containers

Containers continue to replace traditional general cargo and break bulk stowed in vessel holds.
Containerisation of cargoes is becoming ever more widespread worldwide and almost all products,
including some materials previously handled in bulk, are now transported by container.

9
ISO containers are one of the many different types of shipping containers that are available. Containers
are basically of two types:
- standard containers, also referred to as ISO containers or intermodal containers
- non-standard shipping containers
The ISO or intermodal rated containers conform to the International Organisation for Standardisation
(ISO) container manufacturing standards.
Non-standard containers may be similar to ISO containers but may not be intermodal worldwide and
their handling and operation could require special arrangements.
ISO containers are used to transport freight. They can be used in more than one transport mode: by
truck and rail or rail and ship and are therefore also referred to as intermodal containers.
A standard ISO container is shown below. The standard fixed dimensions are a length of 20 ft or 40 ft,
a width of 8 ft and a height of 8.5 ft. The length and height can be variable, with longer units (45 ft, 48
ft and 53 ft) more common in USA domestic trade and variable heights (4.25 ft – half height and 9.5 ft
high cube).

Figure 1.2: ISO container

There are also a large number of specialist containers, see Appendix I.

1.4.3. Type and Size of Design Vessels

A first step in the terminal planning process is to determine the Design Vessel Size (usually in TEU
capacity). In order to do that the designer/planner has to take into consideration the following
commercial factors, which are usually determined at the feasibility and commercial viability stage:
- Throughput forecast for the life cycle of the facility (or at least the next 10-15 years).
- Throughput breakdown to shipping line services. When the generic regional or port wide forecast is
available, the planner has to examine the existing shipping line services and the proximity of the
port to major/minor trade lanes in order to determine the type of vessels that call in the area and
how they may evolve in the future. Generally, there are two types of services.
- Mainline services which use larger vessels and usually visit hub ports to process either gateway or
transhipment cargo.
- Feeder services that operate on a hub and spoke model transferring cargo from hub ports to smaller
regional ports.

10
- General constraints in the area, such as approach channel widths and depths, canal or lock
dimensions, air draft, etc. that may limit the size of the vessels able to call at the port/terminal.
- Typical vessels that visit the region and their particularities (e.g. increased number of reefer
containers, ship gear, etc.).
For small and medium sized terminals, it can be assumed that in general smaller vessels up to feeder
class (i.e. 4,500 TEU-Panamax) will call at these types of terminals. Calls by larger vessels may also
need to be allowed for, especially as feeder vessel sizes are continually increasing as the size of
mainline vessels rises.

Figure 1.3: Small feeder ‘Pagola’ - 678 TEU

After the throughput demand and the design vessel(s) size are decided, the size and number of berths
required can be determined.
Usually since for the same vessel capacity there are several different designs with different geometries
Using average dimensions results in a non-existing vessel and judgement is required to determine a
design vessel envelope whose characteristics will be used for the geometric design of the berth. The
most important vessel dimensions are:
- Length overall (LOA)
- Breadth/Beam (B)
- Fully Loaded Draught (D)
- Length between perpendiculars (LBP) (for fender sizing and spacing)
For fender design the displacement of the largest design vessel is a key parameter, but the size and
characteristics of the smallest design vessel are also required.

11
 Figure 1.4: Vessel dimensions

An example of some typical dimensions is listed in Table 1.1, but actual dimensions and tonnages may
vary widely from those listed.

Length
Length
Carrying between Maximum No. of
Displacement Overall Beam
Capacity perpendiculars Draft Containers Generation
[t] (LOA) [m]
[DWT] (LBP) [m] [TEU]
[m]
[m]
165 000 NA 400 NA 59 16 18 000 Triple E class
PS class (eg Emma
156 900 NA 397 NA 56.4 15.5 15 500
Maersk)
Gudrun Maersk
115 000 NA 367 NA 43 15 9 074
class
100 000 133 000 326 310 42.8 14.5 7 100 6th
90 000 120 000 313 298 42.8 14.5 6 400 6th
80 000 107 000 300 284 40.3 14.5 5 700 5th
70 000 93 600 285 270 40.3 14.0 4 900 5th
60 000 80 400 268 254 32.3 13.4 4 200 4th
50 000 67 200 250 237 32.3 12.6 3 500 3rd
40 000 53 900 230 217 32.3 11.8 2 800 3rd
30 000 40 700 206 194 30.2 10.8 2 100 2nd
25 000 34 100 192 181 28.8 10.2 1 700 2nd
20 000 27 500 177 165 25.4 9.5 1 300 2nd
15 000 20 900 158 148 23.3 8.7 1 000 1st
10 000 14 200 135 126 20.8 7.6 600 1st
7 000 10 300 118 109 20.1 6.8 400 1st

Table 1.1: Containership characteristics

(Based on ‘Recommendations of the Committee for Waterfront Structures Harbour and

Waterways’, EAU 2004)

12
The vessel beam consideration is often replaced by using the number of rows of containers that can be
stacked across the deck. Thus a Panamax vessel has 13 rows, the Maersk PS class (e.g. Emma
Maersk) 22 rows and the Maersk Triple E class 23 rows.

Figure 1.5: Panamax size container vessel ‘Kota Langsar’ – 4,253 TEU

13
2. TERMINAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
2.1. Introduction
Before designing a new container terminal, an overall plan is required. At the conceptual level, it is
essential to find an appropriate location where it will be possible to provide a sheltered area of water of
the appropriate size with suitable marine and land access, to develop an appreciation of the size of port
required and to identify how the terminal will operate.
In this chapter the topics addressed include:
- traffic forecasts and terminal capacity
- access (nautical and landside)
- location
- site conditions
- terminal dimensions
- terminal management models
- phasing
- economic aspects
- stakeholders
The figure below presents the main components of a typical container terminal.

public road

Rail terminal
maintenance
empty yard

service bld.
repair yard
OOG yard

office and
road gate

workshop

trunk
CFS

line

landside traffic circulation system

barge/feeder terminal

quay wall

marine container stack

apron

quay wall

Figure 2.1: Container terminal components

In the idealised scheme shown in the figure 2.1, the quay wall is shown as a single straight berth line,
so that the berths can accommodate varying lengths of ships while maximising the quay usage. The
containers are stacked in a rectangular area directly behind the apron, giving the ability to optimise the
stacking density and hence utilisation of the stacking equipment. Other facilities are located at the back
of the terminal, away from the quay and stack operations, where they do not impact on the terminal
productivity. Similarly, landside traffic and the rail terminal are also separate from the core terminal
operations at the quay and stack.
In practice, these idealised concepts are subject to compromise as the available space for a new
terminal rarely has the ideal size or shape.

14
The terminal operates as a flow of containers from the ship, over the quay, to the stack and onwards
out through the gate and vice versa. The overall capacity of the terminal is the same as the smallest of
the capacities of each of these components in the chain. As the ships and the quayside cranes represent
the greatest cost elements it is usual for a terminal to be planned so that the capacity is dictated by the
quayside operations of loading and unloading the ship, with other processes planned to equal or exceed
that capacity.

2.2. Location of the Terminal, Port and City Relationships and

Environmental and Safety Aspects

2.2.1. General Principles

Before commencing the planning and design process of a container terminal, whether a new greenfield
site or expansion of an existing port, priority should be given to the optimisation of existing facilities (e.g.
with the modernisation of handling or operating systems or removal of other operational bottlenecks
such as limited yard area).
When the demand cannot be satisfied by such improvements, development of a new facility is required
and terminal planners can then be faced with two different situations:
- The terminal to be developed can be at a greenfield site, which will include general port development
(non-specific to container terminals), such as new quays, reclamation or breakwaters. Also, the
marine and hinterland connections need to be assessed.
- The terminal to be developed can be a new one inside an existing port area, an extension or a
reorganisation of an existing container terminal, or a redevelopment of a non-container terminal.
The following criteria should be taken into account in the site selection of a container terminal:
- The availability of deep water to avoid excessive capital and maintenance dredging, enabling the
largest planned ship to be accommodated and offering good and safe manoeuvring conditions (see
section 2.5 for marine access requirements).
- The environmental site conditions including oceanographic and meteorological conditions, so that
shipping movements and port operations are rarely interrupted. Protection is necessary against the
dominant winds (container ships have a large profile (sail area) above the water level) and against
waves (container vessel movements at the berth should be minimised since container handling
requires accurate positioning and vessel control) (see also 2.3 for site conditions).
- The availability of land and/or the necessity of land reclamation or land acquisition: for the planners
to determine the necessary quay lengths, stacking area size, buildings and ancillary facilities,
connections to the hinterland and total space requirements (sometimes including space for
industrial or logistic activities); planners must also pay attention to the available potential area for
future developments.
- The availability of good inland transport links (road, rail or inland waterways).
- The soil conditions.
- The adjacent land uses including existing structures and facilities and extent of urbanisation and
zoning criteria.
Terminal planners, when choosing the location, must have a vision as to the way the terminal will evolve.
This is not always easy and planners must choose a location enabling the future development and
operation of the terminal to be as flexible as possible (in terms of the sizes of vessels, the terminal area
and the layout; see also Section 2.10.1 regarding phasing issues).
Planners must study several options for the location of the terminal. For example, when planning the
land area requirements for the terminal, planners may consider whether or not a benefit can be derived
from the storage of containers (either full or empty) far away from the waterfront in a ‘satellite’ or ‘off-
dock’ area, which might be linked to the main terminal by a specific transport corridor.

15
2.2.2. Container Terminals and City Relationships
Major changes resulting from technological and managerial transformation of maritime transport
operations have occurred during recent decades which have resulted in an increasing spatial separation
between ports (notably container terminals) and cities. Some of the opportunities and constraints
appear to fall into the following categories:
- Container terminals are often restricted by a lack of land in their historical location, close to city
centres.
- This imposes a constraint for urban development as local communities are increasingly concerned
about the negative impacts of port activities (local pollution and congestion).
- The development of port and container activities appear as a constraint to redeveloping waterfront
activities.
- Container terminals that relocate their activities outside the city far from any residential area
(generally at a greenfield site) may have the greatest potential to provide an opportunity to develop
and handle modern container ships.
As a consequence, port and urban developments often seem to conflict with each other. Nevertheless,
ports require a whole range of urban services and functions (e.g. banks, insurance, research, etc.),
while they can offer important economic opportunities for city growth. Therefore, the evolution of both
port and city need not be in conflict but there should be an arrangement to develop common interests
and to face any type of outside competition together (refer IAPH Guidelines – Chapter 6).
Practically, terminal planners must take into account urban development plans and work with urban
authorities to produce joint port-city development plans.
Depending on the nature and the size of the terminal project, it may also be necessary to:
- create a specific group gathering terminal operators, port authorities and other stakeholders
together, as to ensure a high level of co-ordination
- ensure local involvement and organise public debates
Stakeholder analysis as described in Chapter 2.9 is of key importance.

2.2.3. Environmental and Safety Aspects

Environmental and safety aspects play a critical role in terminal planning, to the extent that they
influence the location and layout of the facility.
Environmental issues related to terminal operations typically include:
- Air emissions, including volatile organic compounds and dust
- Wastewater management
- Noise from ship engines and/or generators, cargo handling, loading/unloading operations, traffic on
the terminal
- Visual impacts, such as quay cranes, high empty container stacks near terminal boundaries, lighting
- Fumigation of containers
- Waste reception facilities
- Hazardous goods
- Truck/lorry movements on approach roads
- Terminal lighting

In some cases, the necessity to protect natural resources from negative external effects due to daily
port operations or potential accidents may preclude the siting of a terminal in a location which would
otherwise be the best solution. Such an issue can delay the project.
To prevent such a situation, planners must:

16
- launch an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) at an early stage of the project and for each
location of the terminal
- prepare a comprehensive Environmental Management Plan (EMP), once the terminal has been
defined and before the start of construction
- ensure a continuous dialogue especially with environmental authorities, non-governmental
organisations and local citizens
An EMP is the result of the EIA for a new port project or for existing ports. During the construction and
operational phases of a new port it is essential to ensure the effectiveness of the environmental
mitigation measures set out in the EMP and to give guidance as to the most appropriate way of dealing
with any previously unforeseen effects. A monitoring programme needs to be integrated with
construction to check that mitigation measures are working and to alert in case of pollution or other
environmental problems.
An EMP for marine container terminals should include the following topics:
- A review of disaster management plans, procedures and management responsibilities
- The review of dredging practices, the toxicity of dredged material and the disposal location
- Facilities for collection and disposal of waste oil and solid waste in accordance with the MARPOL
convention
- Measures to improve marine water quality in the port area
- Measures to improve air quality in the port area
- Contaminated land management strategy
- Monitoring of noise levels
- Monitoring of lighting levels
- Hazardous goods
- Protection of flora, fauna and natural habitats
The International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) has formulated the Environmental
Management System (EMS) under ISO 14000. To comply with environmental standards, ports are
seeking certification under ISO 14000. ISO 14000 requires a commitment to compliance with applicable
environmental legislation and regulations, along with a commitment to continual improvement. It does
not however lay down levels of environmental performance.
A principle known as BATNEEC (Best Available Technology Not Entailing Excessive Cost) is often used
to define the technology and practices a sector can afford to deal with environmental challenges.
Any new port and terminal development project must focus on achieving a truly sustainable
development, which not only minimises project impacts but searches for solutions with mutual benefits
for port development and nature. In such a situation, an EIA is a process of limited added value and
must be complemented by an integrated approach like the ‘Working with Nature’ initiative, supported
by PIANC.
No terminal project can be totally safe. However, an adequate location should avoid any damage to
another port area or urban area. Risks must also be reduced to an acceptable level.
For a greenfield project, container terminal planners should find a location:
- sufficiently far from residential areas to avoid inhabitants experiencing negative environmental
effects
- sufficiently far from potentially dangerous port or industrial facilities (such as petrochemical
terminals) so that any damage caused by an accident has limited effect on the container terminal
In the case that such a location cannot be found, planners must put in place protection, for example
acoustic insulation, lighting controls, etc. to limit exposure of citizens to operational noise or light
annoyance, or a specific protection wall to clearly separate port activities, for example a wall of
containers full of sand designed to protect against fire.

17
The chosen location must also offer a sufficient yard area for containers of dangerous cargoes to be
stored on the ground (without stacking). There is no precise safety distance that is recommended. This
depends on the specific on-site conditions and should be the subject of detailed study.
It is likely that port authorities will already have established zoning criteria applying to the whole port
area before commencement of the container terminal planning. Such criteria should guarantee that the
location and the planned activities within a proposed terminal do not involve unacceptable risks to
human health, the environment and neighbouring properties in case of accidents.
The location of the terminal must also ensure a high level of safety for container ships navigating inside
the port area.

2.3. Site Conditions

Once a site has been selected for a new terminal, data must be collected concerning the prevailing
conditions of the site to ensure an appropriate design of the new facilities.
This data includes:
- Water levels – details of tidal variations and historical information on surges or other effects causing
a rise or fall in water level. Estimation of peak high and low water level is important in assessing the
level at which to construct the infrastructure and the required dredged depths for ship access.
Consideration should also be given to long term sea level rise.
- Currents and tidal flow – details of stream velocities, as this can influence ship handling and hence
channel width and other parameters. In conjunction with water sampling to measure suspended
sediment levels, this is also used to predict sedimentation and future maintenance dredging
requirements.
- Wind and waves – for some prospective port development locations, wave measuring buoys are
installed in order to obtain a set of wave measurements to enable the derivation of the wave climate.
At other locations the wave climate is assessed using a hind casting technique from wind records,
usually obtained from a nearby airport. Alternatively, data is also available giving wave heights
offshore, from ships’ observations, and this data can be analysed to give estimated wave heights
at the terminal location.
The wind and wave climate is used to:
- align the channel and berths
- design breakwaters
- assess overtopping of seaward facing structures
- assess the loadings on vessels, structures and cranes
- assess the tranquillity within the port and assess the amount of downtime which may be experienced
at the terminal due to excessive residual wave height and high wind speeds
- rainfall – used in the design of drainage systems
- Soil conditions – it is customary to undertake a geotechnical investigation to ascertain the soil
parameters as these are crucial in the design of the terminal’s structures and buildings. This typically
includes a series of boreholes taken to a depth below the foundations of the deepest structure
(generally the quay wall) to identify the different soil layers and their properties and characteristics.
- Seismic conditions – depending on the location the design of structures to respond to seismic
activity should be carried out in accordance with the PIANC report of Working Group 34 in 2001:
‘Seismic Design Guidelines for Port Structures’.
- Ice/snow conditions used to ensure the integrity of the structural design

18
 Figure 2.2: Overview of the container terminal at the Port of Oslo

2.4. Traffic and Vessel Forecast

2.4.1. Traffic Forecasting

Traffic forecasting is a key element of the terminal planning process. This forms the backbone of
defining what facilities are required and subsequently provides the basis for proving the viability of the
project.
Traffic forecasting consists of ascertaining the extent of trade occurring in the port’s hinterland,
assessing what traffic this could generate through the port, and projecting forwards to give a long-term
outlook on the potential future traffic. The traffic forecasts must include the transhipment trade and any
free trade zone goods.
There are a number of techniques which may be adopted, depending on the circumstances.
- For an existing port, it may be sufficient to start from the existing throughput and assume that the
traffic will generally grow in proportion to increasing GDP. This assumes that there are no significant
new developments or industries planned in the region which would provide additional specific traffic.
- For a new port or terminal, it may be necessary to conduct interviews with local key industries to
ascertain their potential for trade and their specific development plans, as well as studying local and
regional plans, in order to build up a picture of what future traffic may be attracted to the terminal.
- In some instances it may be that the existing general cargo is being transferred into containers and
the rate of containerisation must be assessed to derive a forecast.

2.4.2. Vessel Forecasting

Before the terminal can be planned, it is crucial to understand the nature of the container trade in the
region.

19
It may be that the local import/export trade will only justify small feeder ships; on the other hand, the
strategic location of a terminal may facilitate its use as a hub for transhipment. In each case the size of
container ships actually passing within the geographic region of the terminal serves as a guide to the
ship sizes which the terminal should be designed to receive.
It should be noted that the reason for a terminal to exist is usually because of the import/export traffic.
This is usually reasonably captive, in the sense that it would cost more to route it through a different
port, so the on-going throughput is generally assured provided the facilities keep pace with demand.
Transhipment cargo, on the other hand, is easily switched from one port to another if a better deal may
be negotiated by the shipping line. It is therefore a relatively risky business to develop a terminal
predominantly for transhipment purposes without a sound base load of tied import/export cargo.
The future development of ship sizes should also be considered, to ensure that the quays may be
designed to be dredged deeper in the future and be able to accept larger ships as the trade matures.
Similarly adequate vessel manoeuvring space must be allowed to enable an increase in the size of
turning basins and width of channels including the harbour entrance.
Once the ‘design ship’ sizes are defined, berth lengths and dredged depths may all be assessed with
confidence using these ship parameters.

2.5. Marine Access

The success of a container terminal strongly depends on the design of the marine access. The marine
access or approach channel determines the vessel size that can safely approach the terminal. The
vessel size is related to the economics of shipping since the costs per tonne-km of cargo, in respect of
fuel, manning and capital value for a laden vessel at sea decreases as vessel size increases. For this
reason there is often pressure on a port authority to provide approach channels for large vessels, or to
allow larger vessels to use existing channels.
The optimum marine access varies in time since it depends on variations in both world trade and
markets, and on trends in shipping and container-handling practice.
In order to design the marine access to a desired level of navigability and safety, it is necessary to
assess a number of key elements, including vessel size and behaviour, human factors in ship handling
and effects of the physical environment.
In Figure 2.3 a typical layout of the access channel and turning basin is presented.

Figure 2.3: Principal layout of a port’s marine access

The channel dimensions generally depend on:

- the vessel’s manoeuvrability and speed
- the cargo hazard level

20
- the traffic density
- the visibility and the level of aids of navigation
- the physical environmental conditions consisting of wind, waves, currents, but also the hardness of
the bottom surface
- tidal range
A typical port water area includes the vessel’s stopping area, manoeuvring area, turning basin and
berthing areas in front of the terminals. The length of the stopping area at the inside of the sheltering
breakwaters should be sufficient to allow a vessel entering the port at to stop safely. The stopping length
of a vessel depends on the vessel’s mass, travelling speed, installed engine power and local
environmental conditions. In general the stopping length varies between 3.5-8.0 times the length of the
longest vessel expected to enter the port, subject to its mass and speed. Often, vessels are supported
by tugs and the area required for the tugs during vessel manoeuvres should be taken into account.

2.6. Hinterland Connections

The port hinterland is defined as the area a port supports by providing a conduit for the movement of
goods. The hinterland area of a port is usually an area within a 200-300 km (125-200 miles) radius, but
this depends on the inland transport network and the proximity of other transportation alternatives
(including other ports).
Nowadays, a marine container terminal is usually an important element of a complex transport network
and not just a buffer zone. It is a point of intermodal cargo transfer, connecting two physical
transportation systems either sea from/to sea (by transhipment/cabotage - coastal transport), or sea
from/to waterways, river or lake (by barge) or sea from/to land (either rail or road).
Moreover, as the vessels become bigger, the number of containers handled per vessel call is
increasing. Planners must ensure that any sea side operational improvements are consistent with
landside access and hinterland transport possibilities to avoid bottlenecks in the transport chain which
reduces the cost efficiency of terminal operations.
Depending on its final destination, cargo is divided into three categories: local, transit and transhipment.
Local is the cargo destined to the immediate port hinterland (in the port’s ‘captive’ area) and will usually
exit the container terminal by truck or rail through the gate. Transit is the cargo whose final destination
is much further away (and may include other countries) and is usually transferred to another
transportation mode to continue its journey, while transhipment cargo is loaded onto another ship to
continue its journey by sea. Modal split is the proportion of throughput that is exchanged through the
various terminal components: the berth (waterborne exchanges), the gate (road exchanges) and the
rail yard (rail exchanges). This proportion must be used to assess the optimal sizing of landside access,
while allowing for future adjustments including any that may be incorporated in concession agreements.
Terminal connections have therefore to be defined, both locally and on a global level (between the port
area and the final destination of cargo), taking into account percentage of local or discretionary cargo
and container modal split.
With respect to the inbound cargo (from the sea to the hinterland) the planner needs to estimate the
proportion of actual containers (as opposed to TEU’s) that after being discharged from a vessel will exit
the terminal again across the berth (transhipment) or through the rail yard or gate (gateway).
With respect to the outbound cargo, most of what comes through the gate and the rail yard usually exits
the terminal through the berth.
Additional planning factors to be considered for landside access and hinterland connections are
(adapted from IAPH Guidelines, p. 42):
- Cargo storage patterns and dwell time (including peak traffic)
- Ships, barges, trucks and rail equipment arrival patterns and capacity
- Road, rail or waterway network characteristics
- Economic data on investment and operational costs

21
- Work schedules at quay, in yards and at gates
It has to be noted that terminal operators have only limited or no influence on some of these factors
(especially transport network characteristics used to transfer cargo from the port to its final destination).
The planning of a container terminal landside access has issues that are common to road, rail and
water, yet, each type of connection also has its own specific requirements in relation to:
- loading and unloading equipment
- (temporary) storage area and land use
- customs and other administrative procedures/functions
- passage through the port area
Some of these specific issues regarding transport network and vehicle capacities are addressed below:
Specific Issues Related to Road Connection
When planning road access for a marine container terminal it is essential to ensure sufficient space for
truck waiting areas, a gate complex, manoeuvring areas and parking. The truck waiting area must be
planned to be able to handle peak road traffic flow forecast and the type of handling systems chosen.
Moreover, the planning of a road gate complex must encompass security concerns and forecast
technological devices, such as Automatic Equipment Identification System (AEIS) or Radiation Portal
Monitors. Sometimes, the gate complex can be located in two separate positions for inward and outward
traffic.
Planners must keep in mind that even outside the immediate port area, road congestion is a difficult
issue to tackle, particularly in built up urban areas. This could reduce the efficiency of a road connection
by making the overall transport chain unreliable.
Truck capacity (the maximum number of TEU’s per truck) is also a critical factor. Most countries in the
world allow the circulation of ‘standard’ trucks (even if local restrictions are still possible). This ‘standard’
size allows the transport of either a one fully loaded ISO 40 ft container or two (not fully loaded) ISO 20
ft containers. Yet, some countries allow longer and heavier vehicles (locally, globally or with specific
restrictions) thus increasing the maximum number of TEU’s movable by one truck as well as allowing
the transport of specific containers.
Specific Issues Related to Rail Connection
Rail access to a terminal can be either on-dock (where rail yard is located within the terminal) or off-
dock (where the rail yard is located outside the terminal which requires a short road trip to move
containers from the terminal to the railhead). The two systems have pros and cons but small and
medium terminals often use an off-dock rail access which reduces the area required on the terminal
and can be shared between different terminals.
When planning a rail connection, planners have to bear in mind that bottlenecks can occur in the
transport chain that could prevent the cost-effectiveness of the rail transport of containers. Especially,
transport difficulties can occur due to the non-standardisation of power supply, signalling or rail and
loading gauges between countries (and even sometimes in the same country).
Loading gauges are a critical factor affecting rail transport capacity. For example, the North American
routes (as well as some Australian and Indian rail corridors) have sufficient clearances to cope with
double-stacked container transportation while other countries have gauge restrictions limiting carriage
to single stacking on wagons. Other parameters that can influence the cost-effectiveness of rail
transport include the overall permitted length of trains and whether or not a line is dedicated to freight
transport.

Type of rail gauges Dimensions (mm) Countries

Metre gauge 1,000 South-East Asia, part of India

22
 Standard gauge 1,435 Most of Europe, USA
Russian 1,520 Russia, former Soviet Union
Iberian 1,668 Spain, Portugal

Table 2.1: Dimensions of rail gauges per region

Further information in respect of rail terminal operations can be found in Section 3.4.4.
Specific Issues Related to Waterborne Connections
Waterborne landside access (to/from a river or canal system) can be planned within a maritime
container terminal allowing direct transhipments from the main ship to a coastal vessel or an inland
barge, but this solution decreases the capacity of the maritime quay. In many ports, inland waterway
vessels make use either of a dedicated length of quay near the maritime quay or a dedicated terminal
which requires transfer of containers by truck or train from the marine container terminal to the inland
terminal. Such a dedicated inland terminal will be designed for small inland craft and might be operated
with:
- mobile harbour cranes
- direct reach stacker handling
- fixed port cranes
The capacity of waterway hinterland connections is related to the maximum number of containers a
vessel or a convoy can transport. This is related to the class of the waterway and the type of vessel or
convoy allowed (according to the ECMT classification 1992, classes range from I to VII and waterways
of international importance – which are able to cope with bigger vessels – are Vb, VIa, VIb, VIc and VII).
For example, a standard container vessel (140 m length, 11.4 m wide and 3 m draft) adapted to a class
Vb waterway has a capacity ranging from 140 to 210 TEU’s. Moreover, the minimum height under
bridges also plays an important role: usually, when 50 % of the containers may be empty (or ballasting
would be necessary), 5.25 m under bridges allows the transport of two layers of containers, 7.00 m of
3 layers and 9.10 m of 4 layers (Source: PIANC WG 20, 1999).

2.7. Terminal Dimensions

2.7.1. Berth Geometric Characteristics

Berth is the term used in ports and harbours to define a specific location where a vessel may be moored
alongside a quay or jetty, usually for the purposes of loading and unloading cargo.
The following berth types may be applicable for a small or medium container port:
- General or Multi-Purpose Berth – used to handle a mix of smaller shipments of general cargo and
containers. Vessels using these berths would usually have their own lifting gear, but some ports will
provide mobile cranes.
- Container Berth – used to handle 20 ft and 40 ft standard and non-standard shipping containers.
Vessels are loaded and unloaded by dedicated container cranes, designed specifically for the task.
Alongside the quay there is often a large flat area (container yard) used to store both imported
containers and those ready to be exported.
The number of berths required is determined by matching the throughput demand to the berth capacity,
see also Chapter 6. It is recommended that at least two berths are built in the initial phase of a container
terminal development to minimise vessel waiting time and allow for an element of redundancy.
The berth length should accommodate the design vessel(s) plus adequate space for the mooring lines.
A common rule of thumb to determine individual berth length is the design vessel LOA plus one-half the
vessel beam (B) at each end of the vessel, or 30 m (100 ft), assuming mooring lines at a 45° angle from
the centreline of the vessel. It should be noted that although for planning reasons the berth length is

23
defined as a function of the design vessel, the effective number of berths is dependent on the actual
length of the vessels visiting the terminal. This is because in contrast to liquid bulk terminals where the
berthing locations are clearly demarcated, ideally container terminals have their berths on a straight
contiguous wharf structure, typically parallel to the shoreline, known as a marginal wharf. Hence an 800
m berth may be able to accommodate simultaneously two Super Post Panamax vessels (8,000 TEU),
or two Panamax vessels (4,500 TEU) and a feeder (1,500 TEU).
The area in front of the berth often has to be dredged below the surrounding sea bed, for example to
enable deep drafted vessels to be accommodated at low tide. For ships with tugboat assistance the
length of the dredged area should be not less than 1.25 times the length of the largest ship to use the
berth, and without tugboat assistance not less than 1.5 times the length. The width of a dredged tidal
berth (berth dredged pocket) should be at least 1.25 times the beam of the largest ship to use the berth.
In general, the depth of the berth pocket should be able to accommodate the full loaded draft of the
vessel for all tides plus 5-10 % of draft for under keel clearance, measured from the lowest tide point
(usually Lowest Astronomical Tide (LAT), Mean Low Water Spring (MLWS), or Mean Lower Low Water
(MLLW)) in order to provide clearance for the vessel. The depth should also be designed taking into
account the nature of the sea bed material and any existing rules of the port authority.
An important layout decision is the distance from the wharf face to the waterside crane rail, which
depends on the space required for the miscellaneous devices on the capping beam (bollards, etc.) and
the requirements for service vehicles, fuel bunkering, ship’s gangway, etc. Ideally, the crane rail and
hence the crane itself should be far enough back from the berthing line so that the bow flare of a ship
arriving at the berth is unable to hit the quayside crane leg.
The berth apron is usually wide enough to allow space for the container crane rail span and back reach.
Hatch covers are normally placed in the back reach. Most hatch covers are 12 m to 15 m (35 ft to 45 ft)
wide, so the back reach should provide a minimum of 15 m (45 ft) between the roadway and the rear
crane rail. A two-way road is required between the back reach and the stacks.
If the berth is located close to a navigation channel, the berth face should be set back sufficiently to
allow for the effects of passing vessels on the moored vessels.

2.7.2. Berth Capacity/Occupancy

Berth capacity is the maximum annual container throughput expressed in TEU’s per year that can be
transferred from a vessel to the land and vice versa, without the vessel service level being reduced
below a commonly accepted level. It should be noted that according to normal industry practice
transhipment containers are counted twice in berth throughput statistics and calculations, once off the
first ship and once onto the second ship. Service level is commonly defined in transportation studies as
the ratio of average time waiting for service to the average service time. Here, service time is the time
that the vessel spends on the berth including berthing, mooring, documentation checks and
loading/discharge time, letting go lines and unberthing.
Berth occupancy or utilisation is defined as the percentage of time the berth is occupied by vessels
either berthing or loading and unloading containers. It is normally measured as an average over a period
of a week, month or year.
Berth capacity is a function of many variables, including vessel size, volume loaded and discharged per
call, number of cranes assigned, crane productivity, vessel schedules, schedule integrity and tolerance
for vessels to wait before docking. The limiting factor for the berth is the event of a ship arriving at the
terminal and having to wait because other ships are occupying the berths. Typically, containership
waiting tolerance is very low, since vessels are operating to a strict timetable and operating costs are
high. Therefore, the capacity of the berth is reached when berth occupancy results in vessels having to
wait more than a threshold value relative to the total berthing time required.
For detailed information see Section 3.5.1.

24
2.7.3. Stacking Area
The stacking area is where containers for loading and unloading are stored. This includes containers
for import, export and transhipment.
Usually the stacking area occupies about 60-70 % of the total terminal area (the rest is taken by gates,
building and auxiliary areas) and has ideally a rectangular shape behind the berth. Typical width ranges
between 400-500 m.
Figure 2.4 simply illustrates the three main components that determine the throughput capacity of the
container yard – the time containers spend in the terminal (dwell time), the space available for storage
(storage area) and the storage configuration (storage density).

Figure 2.4: Composition of the yard throughput capacity

An increase in storage density or storage area will result in an increase in storage capacity, while an
increase in dwell time will decrease storage capacity. For different storage systems, different storage
densities and storage stack utilisations at capacity can be achieved.
If no other information is available, Table 3.12 in Section 3.5.3 lists stacking densities for the most
common stacking systems.
For more detailed information on calculating yard area requirements and verifying the yard throughput
capacity see Section 3.5.3.

2.8. Terminal Management Models

For details of the various common terminal management models, see Appendix III. In addition to the 6
model types identified in the Appendix, any contract is possible including use of the latest innovations
in public-private partnerships.
Traditionally, ports have returned a comparatively low return on investment in the 3 to 7 % a year range
but they can provide huge regional trade and job increases. Most of the developed world’s container
ports have been built with public and/or bond money not private investment.

2.9. Stakeholder Analysis

2.9.1. Purpose of a Stakeholder Analysis

Container terminals are often developed in port areas where there are already other activities or, in
some cases, where people reside. To investigate the feasibility of a container terminal development or
the required time for procedures, a stakeholder analysis should be undertaken.
The purpose of a stakeholder analysis is to assess the attitudes of the stakeholders regarding the
realisation of a new (or an extension of a) container terminal.

25
The stakeholder can exert influence and significantly affect planning. Stakeholders may be government
organisations, businesses or other interest groups. They can also be private individuals.
The steps in the recommended process of a stakeholder analysis are as follows:
- Identify the stakeholders
- Create a stakeholder schedule
- Make an assessment of the attitude of the stakeholder through a force field analysis
- Define a strategy

2.9.2. Identification of Stakeholders

The first step is to identify the stakeholders related to the planned container terminal development.
The following stakeholders are often identified in terminal developments:
- port authority
- municipality
- province
- national government
- civilians/residents
- neighbouring companies
- potential operators that could make use of the terminal
- environment organisations

Methodology
Stakeholders can be identified by making a list of addresses and contacts of these organisations.
Especially when there are many stakeholders, or when there is discussion about who is and who is not
involved, a structured methodology is essential.
Result of the First Step
Using a stakeholder analysis provides a picture of:
- the various stakeholders
- how the various stakeholders are related to each other
- what drives the stakeholders in relation to the development of the terminal
- who are the dominant stakeholders
- which interest(s) of which stakeholder needs to be taken into account in decision making

2.9.3. A Stakeholder Schedule

The stakeholder analysis can be worked out in more detail by applying a so-called force field analysis
(see Table 2.3).
With respect to the stakeholders the following information needs to be gathered:
- the relation with the stakeholder
- possible coalitions in which the stakeholder can participate
- the interests of the stakeholder
- the power of the stakeholder
- the priorities of the stakeholder
To estimate the success of the terminal development it is important to determine the strengths and
weaknesses of each stakeholder. A stakeholder who has power, for instance, as a decision maker or

26
 financier, can increase the potential for success once they support the project, or they can hinder the
project if they oppose it.

Interest Power
Stakeholders Relation Coalitions Priority Action
Stakeholder Stakeholder
Growth,
Businesses ++ ++ market share,
continuity
Growth
Port authority ++ ++ transhipment,
continuity
Economy,
Municipality ++ +
welfare
Neighbouring Economy,
- --
municipalities infrastructure
Economy,
Province + 0
welfare
Citizens -- welfare +
Potential Business
++ +
operators economy
Environment
? Environment +
organisations

Table 2.2: Example of a stakeholder analysis*

*The relation and power can be presented by – –, –, 0, + and ++. In general ‘?’-signs indicate that
additional information is required.

2.9.4. Attitudes of the Stakeholders

To know the other stakeholders is an important precondition to assess the extent to which there is
consensus and trust between the stakeholders.

2.9.5. Strategy Development

The schedule in Table 2.3 above may help with thinking about a strategy for the strengthening of the
terminal’s case for development and to eventually realise the planned development, through identifying
who can help and how the ‘power of the opponents’ can be converted to positive energy leading to the
broadest possible support for the planned container terminal development.

2.10. Economic Considerations

2.10.1. Phasing
A key part of the terminal planning process is building in flexibility for the future.
It will normally only be viable, to build as much infrastructure as is required to handle the initial known
traffic, so that the revenue covers the cost of the development. As the traffic grows, additional space
and facilities will be required and at this stage it is important that the terminal can be expanded in
phases.
Each phase must add an increment of capacity which provides enough total capacity for the terminal to
function for a reasonable time before the next phase is required. The size of each phase in the

27
development is a compromise between minimising capital costs; minimising wasted expenditure, for
example on mobilisation of construction contractors, or construction of works that become redundant in
the next phase; maximising capacity and minimising disruption to the on-going operations. The timing
of each new capacity addition is also a compromise, between maximising the usage of the existing
infrastructure and postponing the expenditure on new works until as late as possible while ensuring that
the new capacity is available before congestion reaches an unacceptable level.
Within these phases, further phasing is possible: while a new berth may be commissioned as a single
entity, the back-up areas may be paved progressively as they are required and equipment may be
purchased as needed.
Prior to constructing each new phase, it is important to revisit the master plan to check that the next
phase still responds to the overall requirement, and for example that the design vessel is still appropriate
to the needs of the terminal.

2.10.2. Financial and Economic Aspects

The economic and financial aspects for a terminal development may be quite different.
Financially, the terminal will be expected to make a return on equity, achieve a positive cash flow, cover
the costs of loans and depreciation and enable investment in subsequent phases of the terminal
development.
Economically, the terminal will make a contribution to the country’s economy if the net cost of the goods
imported and exported is reduced, compared to the cost of using a different port or terminal. The value
of the economic benefits achieved by the terminal are therefore not tied to profitability, but to
comparative success.
Once a terminal is operating at near to full capacity, the question as to the timing of the next phase of
development may be addressed in economic terms. The cost of running a terminal with high berth
occupancy means that the amount of ship waiting time increases. Adding an extra berth then reduces
the berth occupancy and consequently the ship waiting time is also reduced. The economic benefit of
this action is a reduction in the cost of ship waiting time. The economically correct time at which to
expand the terminal is when the annualised cost of the new berth equals the saving in ship waiting time.
It should be noted that the cost of the ship waiting time is not charged to the port but to the shippers
and consignees, so this ‘economically correct time’ is not the same as the optimum time from the
terminal’s financial perspective, but could result in additional cargo for the port.
In practice the timing is driven as much by customer pressure as economics, as the terminal will not
wish to risk losing a key customer, for example by having a shipping line switch to an alternative port,
simply through being too slow in bringing additional capacity to the terminal. The terminal will need to
maintain a certain service level to ensure the continued custom of the main shipping lines.

28
3. TERMINAL OPERATIONS
3.1. Introduction
This chapter sets out the operational requirements for small to medium marine container terminals and
the solutions that are most commonly used. The following sections are presented:
- the functions of the main operational zones that characterise all terminals
- the handling systems available, including their main advantages and disadvantages
- the range of handling equipment that may be adopted
- guidance on the spatial requirements for the operational areas
- a summary of the buildings and ancillary facilities that are normally provided
- information on organisational structure and staffing levels

3.2. Operational Areas

3.2.1. Introduction
As with other types of terminal, a container terminal is a complex system that functions efficiently only
when its layout is designed in such a way that the loading and unloading process of vessels flows
smoothly.
All container terminals consist of at least three main operational areas as indicated below:
1. Apron the operational area between the ship and the container yard (the area just
behind the berth face)
2. Yard the primary yard or stacking areas
3. Landside facilities lorry gates, rail terminal, customs inspections, administration and amenity
buildings, equipment maintenance and repair facilities, parking and all other
required facilities, such as storage of empty and out of gauge (OOG) containers

29
 Figure 3.1: Schematic layout of a container terminal (Straddle Carrier Operation)

In some terminals a barge berth or a Container Freight Station (CFS) for the stuffing and unstuffing of
containers may also be required.
The layout and choice of equipment for the above-mentioned areas and their interfaces are, amongst
others, dependent on:
- The number of containers to be handled in a specified period
- The length of quay available for berthing vessels
- The available land area and the required stacking density
- The mode(s) of hinterland transport
As a vessel only generates revenue only when at sea, the length of time it spends at the berth should
be minimised. First and foremost, this can be achieved by fast loading/unloading of the vessel. To
ensure this, the operational areas and handling systems have to be matched.
The handling system used at a terminal refers to the combination of equipment:
- For handling containers between the vessel and the quay
- For transporting containers between the quay and the stacking yard
- For stacking and unstacking containers
- For transporting containers between the stacking yard and the landside operation
- For the landside operation
Independently from the selected terminal handling system, specific processes are performed in the
different areas described below.

30
3.2.2. Apron
In the apron area the ship-to-shore operation (loading and unloading of the ships) is carried out. In the
early days of container shipping the cargo handling in this area was mainly carried out with vessels’ on-
board lifting gear or a jib type quay crane. Nowadays this type of handling is only used on terminals
with a low container throughput. Generally on terminals the ship-to-shore handling of the containers is
usually carried out with specialised cranes.
The apron is also used to store vessel hatch covers and containers awaiting re-stow on board. Generally
these are placed under the crane back reach, but if that area is used to handle containers they can be
placed between the crane rails.

3.2.3. Yard
Adjacent to the apron is the second area, the primary yard, used for:
- Storing inbound containers after they have been unloaded from a vessel and until they are collected
for onward transport by road, rail or barge or (in the case of transhipment) for loading on board
another vessel.
- Storing outbound containers to be loaded on board a vessel, after they have been delivered by
road, rail or barge or (in the case of transhipment) unloaded from another vessel.
These operations usually do not happen at the same time. Therefore, the container yard is an
intermediate storage or transit facility, in which the containers remain from a couple of hours to some
weeks. The time spent in the same position or area is referred to as the dwell time.
There are different possibilities for the layout of this intermediate storage facility (stacking yard), as
follows:
a) If the containers are stacked close together with minimal spacing between them, it may be
called a block stack (Figure 3.2). In this case gantry cranes are used for stacking the containers
delivered by different types of horizontal transport equipment. Wide block stacks are also used
to store empty containers using front loading machines, since specific boxes do not need to be
individually retrieved (see Figure 3.3).
b) An alternative is the linear stack where the containers are stacked by straddle carriers (see
c)
d) Figure 3.4). This type of stacking area requires spacing between the container rows and
relatively wide terminal roads to allow access by the machines. Yards operated using reach
stackers are a variant of this, with the containers typically stacked four rows across with wide
aisles between them (see
e) below).
f) In the USA containers were traditionally stored on trailers (chassis), resulting in very low storage
density and high demand for land. This practice is gradually being phased out.

31
Figure 3.2: Typical container blocks with gantry cranes

Figure 3.3: Block stacking – empty containers

Figure 3.4: Linear stacking with straddle carriers

32
 Figure 3.5: Typical container stacks with reach stackers

At almost every terminal some of the containers will be for refrigerated cargo (known as reefer
containers or reefers). These require a constant, reliable source of electrical power and a dedicated
storage area within the yard.

3.2.4. Landside Facilities

The layout of the landside facilities is determined by the hinterland transport modes. However, the truck
gate(s) are an important feature of all terminals and sufficient space must be allocated for these at the
terminal boundary.
The gate should be segregated from the container yard but in the case of a predominantly truck
operation this functional area is often integrated with the primary yard area. On proceeding to or from
the gates trucks are loaded and unloaded at dedicated spaces either within roadways in the middle of
the stacking yard or at the landward end of it.
In the case of railway transport, the loading/unloading should take place outside the stacking area to
avoid the yard equipment crossing the tracks, for reasons of efficiency and safety. The
loading/unloading is carried out directly by the yard equipment such as reach stackers or dedicated
gantry cranes.
In some ports a common user railway terminal, located outside the terminal, is provided. In such cases,
containers are moved between the primary yard and the railway terminal by road, using both terminal
equipment or road trucks, and these will pass through the truck gate.
As with railway terminals, barge berths may be located within the terminal or outside it; and in some
cases barges use the main berths.
The importance of the need for a container freight station (CFS) has decreased within the past decade
as more and more containers are sent directly from the originator to the consignee without the contents
being consolidated or broken down en route. Nevertheless, some terminals are provided with a CFS
for stuffing/unstuffing purposes, e.g., to avoid the risk of losing containers after they leave the terminal.
But if the land area of a terminal is tight, the CFS should be located outside of the terminal area.
Depending on local requirements, the landside area should also include facilities for customs and/or
health inspections to be performed.
Facilities are also required for temporary storage and containment of leaking containers.

33
3.2.5. Terminal Depth
The depth of a terminal (the distance between the quay front and the landward boundary) depends
largely on the operating system and whether rail facilities are required. A terminal depth of 400 m-500
m (1200 ft-1500 ft) is desirable.

3.3. Terminal Handling Systems

3.3.1. Introduction
To design and operate a successful container terminal is a challenging task. The main objective is to
provide a consistently effective, high quality operation at a competitive price.
The choice of handling system depends, in part, on the following factors:
- Size of vessels
- Traffic forecast (annual container volume)
- Container volume in peak hours
- Available land area
- Required stacking density of the containers (configuration of stacking yard)
- Cost structure (wages, financial facilities, dues)
- Target ship to shore (STS) productivity (moves/hr)
- Geographic restrictions of the terminal area
- Contingent restrictions due to soil conditions
- Environmental impacts like wind, ice, noise, light and snow
- Mean dwell time of containers in the stacking yard
- TEU container ratio (e.g. 1.6 means 60 % of all containers are 40 ft long)
- Percentage of reefer containers
- Percentage of empty containers
- Percentage of LCL (Less than Container Load)
- The connections to the hinterland transport modes road, railway and inland waterways

The number of influencing factors demonstrates that there is no ‘general ideal’ container terminal. The
main types of handling equipment and systems used at small and medium marine terminals to fulfil the
tasks in the functional terminal areas referred to in Section 3.2 and the advantages of each type, are
summarised in this chapter.
Additional reference is made to less common systems and to those that are more suited to major
terminals, since experience has shown that advanced technology introduced at the major terminals
tends to trickle down to the smaller facilities over a period of time.
Other key elements in the system, such as the Terminal Operating System (TOS), spreaders and CFS
operations, are covered elsewhere in this report.

3.4. Types of Equipment

A wide variety of equipment is used in container yards. Selection of appropriate equipment is usually a
matter of economics and desired density and productivity. The following is a brief description of some
common terminal handling equipment.
- Rail Mounted Quay Crane (RMQC) or Ship to Shore (STS) Crane – this is the most commonly used
crane for the loading and unloading of ships. The crane consists of a rigid frame with a boom that
extends horizontally over the ship. The crane travels parallel to the quay on fixed rails and
containers removed from the ship are transferred to terminal vehicles either between the legs of the

34
 crane or in the back reach. Cranes are generally described by the spacing of the crane legs/rail
span and outreach over the ship expressed in boxes (e.g. 16 wide, 30.48 m rail span crane).
- Mobile Harbour Crane (MHC) – this is a boom and jib type crane that can be easily moved between
terminals and is usually a rubber tyred vehicle. In operating mode it is supported on outriggers (see
- Figure 3.6) and the crane can be used for a wide variety of cargo types other than containers. These
cranes are generally less efficient operationally than quay cranes but desirable where flexibility is
more important than container throughput.

Figure 3.6: Mobile harbour crane

- Level Luffing Portal Crane – this is a smaller quay side jib crane very common prior to the
introduction of containerisation. They can serve smaller container vessels, have a rotating hoist and
boom and run on narrower fixed rails (approximately 10 m rail span), but would not normally be
used at dedicated container terminals.
- Rail Mounted Gantry Crane (RMG) – this is a large span gantry crane used in the container or
intermodal yard and operates on two fixed parallel rails. Common versions lift one container up to
five high stacking and can span up to 18 containers wide. Transfer of the containers is typically
either at the end of the stack between the rails or parallel to the stack with cranes that cantilever
outside the rails (see
- Figure 3.7). RMG’s can be equipped to perform automated stacking and sorting operations. RMGs
run on fixed rails and once in place do not move to another stack.

35
 Figure 3.7: RMG cantilever crane

Rubber Tyred Gantry Crane (RTG) – This type of crane is similar to an RMG but operates directly on
the yard pavement or concrete beams (see Figure 3.8).They come with either 8 wheels (2 per corner)
or 16 wheels (4 per corner). Common versions of RTG’s can lift a container over stacks 5 or 6 high by
6 or 7 wide. Transfer of the containers is across the container stacks between the legs of the RTG. It is
possible to move RTGs laterally between stacks with some effort, and therefore typically operate within
one stack on a given operational shift.

Figure 3.8: Rubber tyred gantry crane (RTG)

- Straddle Carrier (SC) – this is a versatile 4-wheeled vehicle, open in the centre which carries a
container straddled between the vehicle legs. Straddle carriers can typically carry a container over
either two or three stacked containers. They can move freely about the container yard,
retrieve/deliver containers at the quay, stack them in the yard and load them on rail cars or truck
chassis. There are two terminals in Australia operating with automated straddle carriers
(‘Autostrads’).

36
- Shuttle Carrier (ShC) – Similar to but shorter than a straddle carrier (can carry one box over one on
the ground). A Shuttle carrier is used primarily to transport containers to and from container stacks
and are used primarily to serve automated yard stacking cranes rather than for stacking. Efforts
are underway to automate shuttle carriers.
- Top Loader/Top Pick – this is a large modified forklift fitted with a spreader for container handling
(spreaders lock onto the top four corners of a container for lifting). This type of equipment typically
stacks containers 4 high at any width stack. However, the stack bays must be constructed such as
to be able to retrieve containers from the interior of the stack. Top loaders can move freely about
the container yard and provide more capacity at critical areas when required. They can also carry
containers around the container yard. However, this is not typically desirable as tipping can occur
with heavy loads and quick stops.
- Reach Stacker (RS) – these machines are similar to a top loader, but equipped with a telescopic
boom that can be raised and extended. The boom allows for handling containers over an intervening
stack or rail track. When operating at full outreach, outriggers may be required.
- Empty Container Handler (ECH) – this is a modified version of a forklift similar to but smaller than
a top loader. An ECH can only handle empty containers, usually by engaging in the container pin
sockets from the side (sometimes called side pick). Most models stack empty containers 6 to 8 high
but some can reach up to 10 high. However, the allowable height is subject to limitations due to
effects of wind. There is no limit to the width of an empty stack and this type of equipment can move
freely around terminal and load empty stacks in different areas of the yard if required.
- Chassis/Trailer – this type of trailer is designed specifically to carry containers on the public
highway. These are occasionally loaded and parked in the container yard where storage density is
not a concern or express delivery of designated cargo is required.
- Bombcart Trailer – this is a chassis trailer with flared sides to ease container placement on the
trailer by cranes. These trailers typically do not have ‘pins’ to lock containers to the trailer and are
therefore not used for over the road operations. They are only used to move containers around the
yard and to deliver to stacking equipment.
- Multi Trailer – this comprises a short train of two to three bombcarts or container chassis linked
together and pulled by a single yard tractor.
- Yard Tractor – also called a hostler, Mafi or tug and is a tractive unit used to move containers on
chassis or bombcarts around a terminal (see
- Figure 3.9). The unit can be a minimalist version of a street rig and has limited features.

Figure 3.9: Tractor and trailer

- Automated Guided Vehicle (AGV) – this is the latest type of equipment for the handling of containers
within the yard and comprises a self-propelled computer navigated driverless vehicle. (See

37
- Figure 3.10). The vehicle can transport containers within a designated automated operating area,
between quay cranes, stacking cranes, intermodal yards, or anywhere designated by the terminal
operating system. Manned operations are kept separate from AGV operations for safety purposes.

Figure 3.10: An automated guided vehicle (AGV)

Cranes and mobile lifting equipment require a spreader that attaches to the top corners of the container.
Spreaders are typically of the adjustable telescopic type that can handle single 20 ft, 40 ft and 45 ft
containers, but also include basic fixed frames for 20 ft or 40 ft containers used at some small terminals
as well as more sophisticated types capable of handling multiple containers in various combinations for
lifting by high capacity STS cranes.
Indicative wheel loads for the aforementioned equipment are presented in the following pages. More
information on calculating the wheel loads for use in pavement design can be found on The Structural
Design of Heavy Duty Pavements for Ports and Other Industries (ref. Interpave).
Ship to Shore Quay Crane Loads
The quay waterside and landside rail beams are designed to accommodate the quay crane. The
geometry and loads below represent typical values for single hoist, single trolley and twin lift quay
cranes.

Design Value
Design Parameter
Waterside and Landside
Wheel Number per Corner 8 wheels/corner
Equivalent Vertical UDL Wheel Load 1,200 kN/Wheel
Horizontal Wheel Loads Perpendicular
196 kN/Wheel
to Rail
Horizontal Wheel Loads Parallel to Rail 350 kN/Wheel
1,560 kN per rail applied 1.8 m above the top of
Crane Stop Load
the rail and in a direction parallel to the rail.
Stowage Pin Load 1,112 kN per rail

Table 3.1: STS gantry crane in-service loads

Design Parameter Design Value

38
 Waterside and Landside
Stowed (Pinned) Wheel Loads
1500 kN/Wheel
(Vertical)
Horizontal Pin-Socket Load 1570 kN/Corner

Table 3.2: STS gantry crane stowed loads

Mobile Harbour Crane (MHC) Loads

Table 3.3 provides indicative loads for the MHC based on the following cranes:
- Gottwald Mobile Harbour Crane HMK 300E (100 tonnes working load)
- Liebherr LHM 550 (63 tonnes working load)

Design Value
Design Parameter
HMK 300 E LHM 550
Max. load 100 t 63 t
Approximate Crane Weight 416 t 467 t
Equivalent Vertical ULL when
2.88 t/m2 1.6 t/m2
traveling (w/o load)
Load/Wheel 14.9 t 5.8 t
Pad Pressure w/ load 26.2 t/m2 >13.4 t/m2

Table 3.3: Mobile harbour crane design loads

Rubber Tyred Gantry Cranes (RTGs)

Standard 1-over-
Design Parameter 6
8 Wheels
CRANE WEIGHT (kN)
Total Weight 1,350 kN
WHEEL LOAD (kN)
Max Wheel Load with No Load and
110 kN
No Wind
Max Wheel Load with Rated Load
162 kN
and No Wind
TYRE SIZE 16.00-25”
TYRE AIR PRESSURE (bars) 8

39
 Standard 1-over-
Design Parameter 6
8 Wheels
CONTACT AREA (cm2)
With No Load and No Wind 1,630
With Rated Load and No Wind 2,000

Table 3.4: Design parameters 1-over-6 RTG Configuration

Reach Stackers (RSs)

40
 Figure 3.11: Reach stacker wheel load distribution

Side Picks (SPs) or Empty Container Handlers (ECHs)

Front
Empty Front Front Rear Axle Rear Axle Rear
Axle
Refrigerated Axle Single Single Tire
Single Tire Tire
Container Dual Wheel Contact
Tire Contact Contact
Weight Wheel Load Radius
Contact Pressure Pressure
Load
(kN) Radius (bar) (kN) (cm) (bar)
(kN)
(cm)
0 97.9 13.7 8.3 52.9 15.6 6.9
49 138.6 16.3 8.3 36.6 13.0 6.9

Table 3.5: ECH wheel loads

Tractor-Trailer Units (TTUs) and Vehicles

41
Figure 3.12: TTUs wheel load distribution

42
Automated Guided Vehicles

Figure 3.13: AGV wheel load distribution

3.4.1. Ship-to-Shore Operations

Ship-to-shore operations are almost entirely devoted to handling containers between the vessel and
the quay and are generally performed using one of the following methods:
- Using rail-mounted quay gantry cranes (RMQC) specifically for container handling
- Using mobile harbour cranes (MHC)
- Using rail-mounted level-luffing portal cranes
- Using ships’ gear
These cranes were described in the previous section.

43
The majority of medium-size and many small container terminals operate with RMQCs and this method
generally offers the highest productivity at the quay side for handling of containers, especially as several
cranes can operate in close proximity. However, it is possible for smaller and some medium-sized
terminals to use alternative cranes for loading/off loading as described above. These cranes may be
particularly appropriate in offering flexibility at multi-purpose terminals that handle break bulk cargo as
well as containers. However, the operation of break bulk terminals is outside the scope of this report.
Tandem lift cranes (which can be single or dual hoist) able to lift four 20 ft or two 40 ft containers are
becoming more common and cranes able to lift three 40 ft are also available, but transfer systems need
to be modified to suit.
Some RMQCs are fitted with two trolleys and an intermediate elevated platform, which enables the
movement of containers on/off vessels to be decoupled from the operation to load containers on/off the
landside equipment.
At some terminals, and for part of the container exchange, container vessels can be loaded and
unloaded at the same time – a process termed ‘double cycling’.
Some small terminals and some terminals in inland harbours operate with wide-span RMQCs that can
also stack containers within a limited distance behind the quay, for example to directly serve a container
stack or in combination with a freight depot.
MHCs are useful where the quay is not equipped with rail tracks and can also be used to supplement
RMQCs. They can be an appropriate solution at terminals handling feeder vessels or larger ships with
relatively few containers to be moved or on multi-purpose-terminals.
Use of ships’ gear generally results in low rates of productivity and is best suited to low throughput
terminals where there are no high capacity cranes or no cranes at all.
Table 3.6 provides a brief summary of the main advantages of each type of ship-to-shore operation.

44
 Rail-Mounted Quay Gantry Crane
Topic Mobile Harbour Crane (MHC) Ships’ Gear
(RMQC)
Unit Productivity High; can be increased and operation Medium Low; not affected by
decoupled from quay-to-stack conflicting demands for
transfers using double trolley cranes cranes to serve other berths
Lifting Capacity May be designed to lift two or four May be designed to lift two Single lift
containers simultaneously containers simultaneously
Spacing along Quay Adjacent cranes can operate buffer-to- Adjacent cranes must be well apart Not applicable
buffer, enabling high density coverage to avoid risk of colliding booms
and berth productivity
Accessibility along Vessel Cranes can be readily moved along Crane can cover several rows of Not applicable
the quay for access throughout the containers along the vessel from a
vessel single position, then has to be
moved
Quay Apron Width Generally wider than for other types Fairly compact Not applicable
Operational Restrictions at Quay Corners in quay walls require curved None None
Corners track and special bogies and may
cause operational delays
Compatibility with Automation Very suitable, especially in conjunction May be used in conjunction with Low technology facilitates
with automated quay-to-stack some automated operations rapid start-up with minimal
operations training
Associated Horizontal Transfer Can be used with all types of Suitable for use with tractor-trailers, Suitable for use with tractor-
Systems horizontal transfer equipment and with SCs (straddle carriers) if trailers in conjunction with
the two operations are co-ordinated mobile loaders (e.g. RSs –
reach stackers)
Loadings High loadings on the rails may be Loadings on quay structure are Avoids the need for heavy
reduced by adjusting the wheel distributed via the crane outriggers, foundations to support quay
configuration designed to suit the quay loading cranes
capacity
Rail Tracks High capacity rails required Rail tracks not required Rail tracks not required

45
 Rail-Mounted Quay Gantry Crane
Topic Mobile Harbour Crane (MHC) Ships’ Gear
(RMQC)
Power Source Usually employ shore electrical HV Usually powered by crane’s diesel Zero energy cost to the
power supply, but diesel alternative engine, avoiding the need for HV terminal for ship-to-shore
exists where power supply is power supply, but may use shore moves
inadequate electrical power if available
Commissioning Cranes usually delivered erected but Fairly short delivery periods for Lack of quay cranes avoids
require several weeks to commission rapid start-up, and cranes can be problems with delivery lead
delivered at a location outside the times and the reception and
terminal and can be hired for short commissioning of equipment
periods
Capital Cost of Cranes and Highest Medium No investment required for
Supporting Infrastructure quay cranes
Ability to Handle Other Cargo Cranes may be used to handle other Cranes may be used to handle May be used to handle other
types of cargo other types of cargo types of cargo
Potential for Redeployment Redeployment would be a major Cranes may be deployed elsewhere Not applicable
operation in the terminal or to / from another
terminal (including used market)
NOTE: when comparing the cost of different systems, the capital, operating and maintenance costs during the life of the facility should be
considered

Table 3.6: Advantages of each type of ship-to-shore operation

46
Some ports handle containers using heavy duty rail-mounted jib portal cranes, but these tend to be
multi-purpose facilities that also handle other types of cargo and the handling rates achieved would be
lower than using dedicated equipment.
Another method that may be suitable for terminals that are limited to serving small vessels, such as
barges and small coasters, is to provide derrick cranes on the quay, which may be either fixed in position
or mounted on rails.
Containers may be handled on/off vessels using floating cranes, which can be used in various ways:
- the floating crane may be placed between the quay wall and the vessel at terminals where the quay
is too shallow to accommodate the vessel or too weak to support a heavy crane
- the floating crane may be used to tranship containers between the vessel and a lighter or barge,
which is used to transport the containers to/from a shallow quay
- as above, but the crane itself may be attached to the lighter or barge
In addition to handling containers, ship-to-shore operations also include handling vessel hatch covers,
twist-locks, container unlashing and lashing, container re-stows and (occasionally) non-containerised
heavy lift cargoes and the terminal needs to be designed accordingly.

3.4.2. Stacking Operations

Stacking operations involve moving containers into and out of the stacks, for which several methods
are available including the following most commonly used (in descending order of potential stacking
density):
1. Using rail-mounted gantry cranes (RMG)
2. Using rubber-tyred gantry cranes (RTG)
3. Using straddle carriers (SC)
4. Using mobile front-lifters, such as reach stackers (RS), top picks (TP) and empty container handlers
(ECH)
These machines are described in Section 3.3.
RMG and RTG systems can be designed to provide similar layouts, stacking densities and
productivities, but each one has its advantages and disadvantages. RMGs can long travel carrying full
containers and are better suited to full automation and include the category known as automatic
stacking cranes (ASC).
SCs are the only type of machine that can be used to perform both quay-to-stack transfers and stacking:
with this direct operation interchange grids are required for loading/unloading road trailers. In indirect
operations SCs are confined to the stacks, the transfers being carried out by different means: this
system also requires interchange grids on the waterside of the stacks.

47
 Figure 3.14: A straddle carrier in operation

Reach Stackers are versatile as they can be used in all parts of the terminal provided the pavement
has been designed to support the high wheel loadings. Although they require wide aisles to manoeuvre,
both RS’s and ECHs are especially suitable for block stacking empty containers where access to
particular containers is not required. The development of these types of equipment has resulted in
forklift trucks (FLT) and side-lifters becoming less popular.

Figure 3.15: A reach stacker

Table 3.7 provides a brief summary of the main advantages of each type of stacking operation.

A few major terminals have installed overhead bridge cranes for stacking containers, which can be
designed to achieve a greater stacking density than those listed above: they may also be used for CFS
operations. Since these tend to be costly and less versatile than the alternatives, they would not
generally be considered appropriate for small and medium terminals.

48
 Mobile (e.g. Reach Stacker,
Topic RMG RTG Straddle Carrier
ECH)
Potential for medium stacking
Potential for high speeds, Potential for high stacking Potential for high stacking
Stacking Density densities and good
stacking densities and precision densities densities for empty containers
accessibility to containers
Very suitable, including in
Compatibility with Can be used with a degree of Can be designed for automated Low technology facilitates rapid
conjunction with automated
Automation automation operation start-up with minimal training
quay-to-stack operations
Can be designed to stack full
Can be designed for a wide
Stack Width and Can be designed to span up to Can be designed to stack 4 containers up to 5 tiers high (in
range of spans and stack
Height 9 rows and up to ~ 6 tiers high tiers high first row) and to block stack
heights
empty containers 8 tiers high
Limited to terminals with large Suited to terminals with large Can operate in irregularly Can operate in irregularly
Terminal Shape
rectangular stacking areas rectangular stacking areas shaped stacking areas shaped stacking areas
Cranes within a stack can be
designed to ‘nest’ (i.e. pass Machine versatility enables
each other using two sets of rails them to be used for various
Flexibility of Cranes can move between
and crane sizes), but in general Whole fleet can be deployed functions at any location in the
stacks and to/from remote
Operation cranes cannot move between anywhere within the stack yard terminal that is capable of
maintenance facility
stacks withstanding the high wheel
loads

49
 Mobile (e.g. Reach Stacker,
Topic RMG RTG Straddle Carrier
ECH)
Stacks oriented end-on to the
quay can be designed for
container transfers at the stack Good control as terminal and
ends but this results in Terminal transfer vehicles and road vehicles are handled at The machines serve both
Traffic considerable unproductive long- road vehicles need to share separate locations and are terminal and road vehicles
Segregation travel; stacks parallel to the lanes, which requires good segregated from the stacks; within the stack yard, which
quay may require terminal and traffic management with direct operations, tractor- requires strict control
road vehicles to share lanes, trailers are not required
which requires good traffic
management
Rail Tracks and Medium/heavy rail tracks are Rail tracks are not required; Rail tracks are not required Rail tracks are not required
Travelling with required; cranes can carry full except for local shuffles, the
Containers containers along the stack at cranes cannot carry containers
high speed while travelling from stack to
stack
Loadings Cantilevered spans may result Specially designed runways Wheel loads may require Stack yard layout can be
in reduced rail spans and wheel may be required but can localised strengthening of readily modified
loads but longer cranes sometimes be avoided by using pavement for runways, but
16-wheel machines instead of uniform paving design allows
8-wheel, which allows flexibility flexibility in stack yard layout
in stack yard layout
Paving Paving of stack areas can be Paving of stack areas can be Entire stack yard generally has Entire stack yard generally has
Requirements lighter duty if heavy vehicles are lighter duty if heavy vehicles to accommodate the heaviest to accommodate the heaviest
excluded are excluded loadings loadings
Power Source Usually employ fixed HV Usually powered by crane’s No requirement for electrical No requirement for electrical
electrical power supply, but diesel engine, avoiding the power supply infrastructure power supply infrastructure
diesel alternative exists if power need for HV power supply, but
supply is inadequate fixed electrical power is also
available for low emissions

50
 Mobile (e.g. Reach Stacker,
Topic RMG RTG Straddle Carrier
ECH)
Emissions Zero air and low noise Medium air and noise Medium air and noise Medium air and noise
emissions with electrical power emissions with diesel power, emissions emissions
low or zero with electrical
power
Delivery Lead Long lead time Long lead time Medium lead time Short delivery lead time and
Time low technology facilitate rapid
start-up with minimal training
Capital Costs High, but long design life and Medium Medium to low, but total fleet Relatively low, suitable for low
low maintenance should help to cost may be comparable to budget terminals; relatively
minimise whole-life costs RTG system; relatively high high pavement maintenance
maintenance costs for costs
equipment and pavement
NOTE: When comparing the cost of different systems, the total capital, operating and maintenance costs during the life of the facility should be considered.

Table 3.7: Advantages of each type of stacking operation

51
At the opposite extreme, some terminals with plenty of space, relatively low throughputs and short dwell
times are able to avoid lifting containers altogether by leaving them parked on chassis. Although this
system results in a very low stacking density and therefore low surface loadings, it requires a large area
of land with low revenue potential and also demands a large chassis fleet.

3.4.3. Horizontal Transfer Operations

Container moves between the quay and stack are performed by one of the following:
- Using tractor-trailer sets (TT)
- Using straddle carriers (SC)
- Using automated guided vehicles (AGV)
These machines are described in Section 3.4.
TT sets consist of a purpose-designed tractor coupled to a trailer and are by far the most common
method for the movement of containers within a terminal and are generally equipment which is not
licensed for use on public roads. The sturdiest trailers are the open chassis bomb-cart type, but platform
trailers may also be used. Cassette systems can be used to enable containers to be double-stacked
(similar to those used for Ro-Ro operations). Multiple trailer sets may be used to reduce the requirement
for tractors and drivers.
Tractor-trailer operations are universal since they can be used with every type of ship-to-shore operation
and all stacking operations except where straddle carriers are used. Tractor-trailer units are also
suitable for moving containers between the stacks and the rail terminal. However, with an SC stacking
operation it would be common for the SCs also to perform such transfers and for terminals with a high
degree of automation the use of AGVs may be more appropriate.
For low key operations, including situations where containers have to be transported between terminals
on a public highway, side lifters may be appropriate: these are trucks that can hoist a container on and
off by means of built-in cranes.
Straddle carrier transfers are best suited to terminals where ship-to-shore handling is performed by
RMQCs and they would only be used where the stacks are also SC-based. In some terminals with a
SC yard system TTs are used for the quay-stack moves, but low height SCs (shuttle straddle carriers –
ShCs) may also be used for transfers in this situation. Quay-to-stack transfers using SCs are decoupled
from the ship-to-shore operation.
The term AGV is used to denote a range of driverless vehicles that are guided using computer systems.
They include the following types:
- a platform with built-in power and steering, combining the functions of tractor and trailer
- as above, but with a lifting device (lift AGV) to enable containers to be lifted off or lowered onto
specially designed elevated frames at the end of the stacks (for use in conjunction with RMGs or
ASCs)
- automated straddle carrier (autostrad): this solution has been implemented in the Patrick Terminal
in Brisbane, Australia and it is used both for quay-stack moves and stacking, providing a viable
alternative for medium-sized, low density terminals
- currently under development are the automated shuttle carrier and the cassette AGV
Several designs have been proposed to move containers between the quay and the end of the stack
by means of fixed electrically-powered conveyors installed along the length of the quay apron, with
varying degrees of automation built in. This enables the use of mobile equipment for this operation
(which is usually diesel-powered) to be eliminated. Although the principle has good potential, so far
none of these have been installed at an operating terminal.
Table 3.8 provides a brief summary of the main advantages of each type of horizontal transfer operation.

52
Topic Tractor-Trailer Straddle Carrier AGV

High, but should be restricted for safety

reasons; can travel between the RMQC
Manoeuvrability High Limited to designated paths
rails if there is sufficient headroom,
otherwise under the back reach
Ability to lift and travel with load enables
Types that can also lift containers enable
Interface with Ship- transfer operations to be decoupled from
Quay crane depends on presence of transfer operations to be decoupled from
to-Shore ship-to-shore operations, but SC must
correctly positioned tractor-trailer quay operations; for others, quay crane
Operations deposit outbound containers accurately on
depends on presence of AGV
the quay
SC is also used for stacking operations, so
Types that can also lift containers enable
Interface with no other equipment is required and there
Stacking crane depends on presence of transfer operations to be decoupled from
Stacking are no stacking interface problems; SCs
correctly positioned tractor-trailer stack operations; for others, stacking
Operations serving end-on RMG stacks must deposit
crane depends on presence of AGV
inbound containers accurately
Quay Apron Very wide quay aprons can be avoided, Very wide quay aprons can be avoided
Very wide quay aprons are required
Requirements and narrow traffic lanes can be used unless the SCs are automated
Compatibility with Can be integrated with automated stacking Can be automated and can be integrated An essential element of a fully automated
Automation systems with automated stacking systems terminal, enhancing personnel safety
No infrastructure required for
No infrastructure required for
guidance/positioning, except for
guidance/positioning, but may be deployed AGVs facilitate precise positioning at both
Positioning automated SCs, but may be deployed to
at quay and yard cranes to enhance ends of cycle
enhance interfaces with quay and yard
interfaces
cranes
Wheel Loadings Lowest Medium Highest, depending on type
Low emission diesel engines are available;
Emissions Low emission diesel engines are available Low emission diesel engines are available future use of battery power would suit
low/zero-emission terminals

53
Topic Tractor-Trailer Straddle Carrier AGV

Medium/high, but extensive heavy duty Medium/high, but extensive heavy duty
Capital Cost Lowest
paving also required paving also required

Medium accident risk for drivers Normally no accident risks for persons as
Risk of Accidents High accident risk for drivers they are not allowed in automated
operation areas
Short delivery lead times and low
Driver Drivers need special training; with direct
technology facilitate rapid start-up with No drivers required
Requirements operations, numbers are relatively low
minimal training
Maintenance Basic; the facility to separate tractors and Usually require specially designed high-
High standard; also highly trained
Facility trailers provides further operational bay workshops and facilities for cleaning
maintenance staff are required
Requirements flexibility and access
Can be readily redeployed between
Potential for Can be readily redeployed between
Normal road transport impossible similarly equipped terminals; normal road
Redeployment terminals
transport on trailers possible

NOTE: When comparing the cost of different systems, the capital, operating and maintenance costs during the life of the facility should all be considered.

Table 3.8: Advantages of each type of horizontal transfer operation

54
3.4.4. Rail Terminal Operations
Containers are generally handled on to and off railway wagons by one of the following methods:
- Using rail-mounted gantry cranes (RMG) or rubber-tyred gantry cranes (RTG);
- Using mobile equipment such as reach stackers (RS) or straddle carriers (SC).

RMGs are suitable for high volume terminals and where several rail tracks need to be operated, but are relatively expensive especially if the crane structure
has cantilevers and therefore has to be long enough to enable containers to pass between the legs. RTGs and SCs are sometimes used instead of RMGs, but
are less versatile and not suitable for cantilever configuration.
In other cases, the use of RSs can provide an efficient operation but requires wide areas of heavy duty pavement for manoeuvring.
Table 3.9 provides a brief summary of the main advantages of each type of rail terminal operation.

Table 3.9. Advantages of Each Type of Rail Terminal Operation

Topic RMG RTG Mobile (e.g., RS, SC)

Suitable for high volume terminals with Suitable for high volume terminals with
Suitable for low volume terminals with
Capacity many sidings (typically 4 between the many sidings (typically 2-3 between
few sidings (typically 2)
crane legs) the crane legs)

Can be designed for a wide range of Can be ordered in many different

spans to fit the required number of Layout of local buffer stack yard can be
spans, and with cantilevered spans to
sidings, similar to the width of the readily modified; versatility of
Flexibility segregate longitudinal road
storage stacks machines enables them to be used to
movements and reduce rail spans;
supplement RMG operations
suitable for twin-lift operation

Not suitable for automation Short delivery lead times and low
Compatibility Suitable for automation if rail wagons
technology facilitate rapid start-up with
with Automation are consistent
minimal training

Medium duty rail track required; can Runway beams required

Civil Works Heavy duty paving required
carry full containers along the track

55
Topic RMG RTG Mobile (e.g., RS, SC)

Usually employ fixed HV electrical Diesel or diesel-electric engine

power supply, but diesel alternative No requirement for electrical power
Power Source
exists where power supply is supply infrastructure
inadequate
Long design life and low maintenance Medium cost for reasonably long
Relatively low capital cost suitable for
Capital Cost should help to minimise whole-life design life
low budget terminals
costs
NOTE: When comparing the cost of different systems, the capital, operating and maintenance costs during the life of the facility should be
considered.

56
3.4.5. System Combinations
Most of the operational systems described above could be used in combination with the others, but for
most practical situations the choice of permutations is more limited and generally conforms to the
combinations illustrated in Figure 3.16.
Rail
System Quay Transfer Yard Transfer Terminal

(a) STS + TT options

RMG
RMG
RTG
STS TT TT RTG
SC
RS
RS

(b) STS + SC
SC
STS SC SC SC
RMG

(c) STS + ShC or AGV

ShC
STS RMG TT RMG
AGV

(d) MHC options

RTG
TT
MHC RS TT RS

SC SC

(e) Ships' gear

options
TT RS
Ship TT RS
SC SC

Figure 3.16: Choice of terminal handling systems

57
3.4.6. Typical Ratios of Handling Equipment
Experience has shown that the following ratios of operating equipment may be appropriate for typical
terminals. These are on the basis that the landside movements should always be sufficient to keep
pace with ship-to-shore handling operations. These ratios do not take into account unusual
circumstances, such as very short or long travel distances, or the need for spare machines to allow for
breakdowns and maintenance. It should be noted that these are intended as a guide but the
requirements for every terminal and the capacities of each component of the system should be carefully
analysed before a decision is made on the numbers of equipment to be provided.
Ratios for AGVs are highly dependent upon the type of AGV used.
Ships’ gear is often used in situations where the quay is congested or remote from the stacks and the
containers are often stacked temporarily on the quay apron while awaiting transfer. For this reason, it
is not appropriate to quantify the handling equipment requirements.
The ratios shown below exclude the additional numbers of equipment needed to handle containers
between the stacks and inland transport (road or rail) facilities. The numbers required are also
influenced by such factors as the coincidence of peak activity at the quay and the gate.
For each combination of equipment shown, the typical ratios are as follows:
- STS + TT.
For the quay-to-stack transfer, 1 STS requires 3 to 6 TTs.
For stacking, 1 STS requires 2 to 3 RMGs, RTGs or RSs – in general transhipment terminals
require lower ratios than gateway terminals.

- STS + SC.
For the quay-to-stack transfer and stacking, 1 STS requires 3 to 5 SCs.

- STS + AGV.
For the quay-to-stack transfer, 1 STS requires 3 to 4 AGVs.
For stacking, 1 STS requires 2 to 3 RMGs.

- MHC + TT.
For the quay-to-stack transfer, 1 MHC requires 3 to 4 TTs.
For stacking, 1 MHC requires 2 RTGs or SCs or RSs.

3.5. Space Requirements

3.5.1. Berth Capacity

Historically, it has been observed that when the berth occupancy in a 2 berth terminal exceeds 50 %
there is a significant chance of vessels having to wait more than about 25 % of their berthing time.
Therefore, a berth occupancy level of 50-60 % has generally been adopted as the service level criterion
for berth capacity for typical two berth terminals. For a discussion on acceptable levels of waiting time
in container terminals, see Agerschou et al. (2005). The best approach to estimate berth capacity is to
use queuing theory. In the case of a container terminals, a ratio of 10 % between waiting time and
service time is generally accepted. Table 3.10 shows the relative waiting times for single, two and three
berth terminals, derived from UNCTAD Table IX (Erlang distributions for waiting and service times). It
can be seen that the limiting berth occupancy based on the 10 % ratio is 30, 50, and 60 % for 1, 2 and
3 berths respectively.

58
 Berth occupancy (utilisation) Single berth Two berths Three berths
30% 0.13 0.02 0.01
40% 0.24 0.06 0.02
50% 0.39 0.12 0.05
60% 0.63 0.22 0.11
70% 1.04 0.41 0.23
80% 1.87 0.83 0.46
90% 4.36 2.00 1.20

Table 3.10: Average ship waiting times (as a factor of service time)
(Source: UNCTAD, Table IX, for E2/E2/n queuing)
There is a misconception that berth occupancy determines capacity and not service level. The result of
this misconception is that berth capacity for a terminal is considered achieved when its total average
berth occupancy reaches a level (commonly around 55 %) without consideration of how many berths
this terminal operates. Queuing theory demonstrates that a terminal with 3 or more berths can provide
the same service level to a vessel with a higher average berth occupancy than 50-60 %. Logically, the
more berths the terminal has, the lower the probability that all the berths will be occupied.
Berth capacity depends more on the ship characteristics (length, capacity, percentage of vessel TEU
capacity discharged/loaded per call) and schedule rather than the berth geometrical characteristics
themselves. For example, the same physical berth has a different throughput capacity if it is serving a
few large vessels every week on a fixed schedule that load and discharge a large percentage of their
capacity, compared to serving many services of small to medium size vessels, with significant schedule
variability, discharging and loading small container quantities.
Berth capacity may be estimated in several ways, depending on the level and reliability of information
available and the accuracy that is required and can be realistically achieved. The methods used to
estimate the annual capacity include the following:
- An approach based on an estimated TEU throughput per metre of berth per year – this method
takes no account of crane resources and there is wide variability from one location to another, but
it can be useful when comparing terminals if data is scarce. Actual TEU/m figures may range from
less than 500 to more than 3,000 at large mainline terminals. For planning purposes a figure in the
range 1,000-1,400 is considered reasonable for a modern well equipped berth at a small/medium
terminal.
- A resource-based approach that can be suitable for a high level estimate, based on the number of
cranes and their estimated annual productivity. The actual number of STS crane moves per year
could range from 20-30,000 at a small terminal to 125-150,000 at a larger terminal with modern rail
mounted gantry cranes; or 50-80,000 using modern mobile harbour cranes (MHCs).
- A slightly more sophisticated approach is based on the number of cranes and their estimated gross
hourly productivity, taking into account the berth occupancy, interference between cranes (if
applicable), crane availability/downtime and the available working hours per year. Commonly used
values for gross productivity are 20-25 moves/hour for STS cranes and 15-20 moves per hour for
MHCs for small to medium terminals. Highly sophisticated terminals with double spreaders and
sufficient horizontal transport productivity can reach gross productivities upwards of 30 moves/hour.
- A more detailed calculation based on a typical weekly vessel schedule designed to achieve an
acceptable berth occupancy corresponding to the desired service level at the available number of
berths, based on the anticipated types of vessels and container exchanges per call and the
estimated crane productivities and mooring/unmooring times.
- Additionally, stochastic discrete event simulation can be used to estimate berth capacity. The
uncertainty in the vessel arrival, mooring and service times is accounted for in addition to all the

59
 other factors. However, it is difficult to obtain credible inter-arrival time and service time distributions
that would be applicable to a greenfield port.
Once the berth quay capacity has been calculated, the capacity of the terminal transport, the yard
stacking and other processes should be planned to at least equal the berth quay capacity. In this way,
the overall terminal capacity will be equal to the berth quay capacity and not be restricted by bottlenecks
elsewhere on the terminal.
Productivity and Targets
The performance of a container terminal will depend on the following:
- The ratio of loaded vs. unloaded containers
- The number of unproductive moves (i.e. containers that do not have to be unloaded but have to be
moved out of the way)
- The level of automation of the gantry cranes
- The average weight of containers and the proportion of containers requiring special attention (flats,
liquid bulks, reefers)
- The mix of containers of various sizes (20 ft/40 ft/45 ft)
- Commercial constraints
Productivity targets will generally vary according to the geographic position of the terminal by world
region, the type of traffic handled (transhipment versus gateway), the operator type and the terminal
size (small, medium, large)1. In the table below targets are identified according to the terminal size.

Targets
Performance Indicator
small medium
Quay line performance (Number of
300-600 600-1,200
TEU/metre of quay)

Table 3.11: Performance indicators

(Source: Based on Drewry shipping consultants, 2011)

3.5.2. Apron Width

The productivity at the quay side generally dictates the productivity of the container terminal. In order
to obtain excellent productivity, the space of the berth apron should always be kept clear, other than for
well-ordered storage of hatch covers, temporarily landed containers or special cargo. The required
apron width depends on the:
- Type of the ship to shore (STS) crane (gantry crane or mobile harbour crane)
- Dimensions of the ship to shore crane (outreach, rail span, back reach)
- Yard operating system

The berth apron width W is divided into four parts as shown in Fig 3.17:
A— the space between the edge of the quay wall and the centre line of the waterside rail of the
quay cranes
B— the space between the centre lines of the waterside and landside rails (the rail span of the
cranes)
C— the back reach of quayside container cranes measured from the centreline of the landside rail

60
E— the landside space not covered by the back reach, to the border with the storage/marshalling
yard

Figure 3.17: Typical quay apron arrangement

The space A is between the centre line of the waterside rail and the cope line. This area provides space
for mooring bollards, hydrants, utility pits and a crane cable trough for STS crane supply cables. In this
area, the mooring of the ships is carried out and the ship access ladders are also placed here. To
reduce the required outreach of the ship to shore cranes, the width A should be kept to a minimum, but
it has to be wide enough to minimise the risk of a collision between the ship and the front legs of the
crane. A width of at least 2-4 m is required, and preferably 4 m, taking the quayside crane structure into
account. On some larger terminals the dimension from berth (space A plus depth of fender) face to front
of the rail, A is 6 m or more.
The space B between the waterside and landside rails and landside width C covered by the back reach
of the quayside container cranes has to provide space for the following functions:
1. laying down of the vessel hatch covers (sometimes also stored on containers on the ship’s deck or
on special platforms attached to the STS crane, e.g. in Bremerhaven)
2. access to personnel and emergency vehicles
3. access for oversize cargo loading and unloading
4. horizontal transport traffic lanes
5. waiting and turning space for the horizontal transport
6. laying the containers of the vessel on a horizontal transport vehicle or a buffer
7. space for storm water drainage components such as trench drains, catch basins, drainage pipes
and vaults, etc.
8. space for removal of the twist locks (often this is done on a crane platform)
9. Space for storm tie downs for STS cranes
These functions are usually grouped to transfer to horizontal transport (3, 4, 5 and 6) and auxiliary
functions (1, 2, 7, 8 and 9) and they can take place either between the crane legs or at the back reach.
The useful space between the rails should be (B-3) m, taking into account the required clearance from
the structures of the container cranes. The rail span B and back reach C should be selected taking into
account the following factors among others:
- Economical crane design for the desired outreach, which in turn depends on the largest design
vessel
61
- Economical crane rail foundation design
- Number or traffic lanes or other auxiliary functions that have to be accommodated under the legs
or at the back reach
For a modern container terminal, 100 ft or 30.48 m is the most common rail span, to accommodate Post
Panamax Cranes. But if the vessels are handled with a crane of 18 or 20 m rail span, the apron width
can be reduced by 10.5-12.5 m. In a few cases, much wider cranes are installed, with rail spans of over
40 m.
The width of each row of containers is at least 2.5 m and hatch covers require between 10 and 16.5 m.
The width required for one traffic lane is generally 3.5 m for vehicles such as terminal tractors/trailers
or road-going vehicles and 5.5 m for straddle carriers. Where a number of quayside container cranes
are stationed on a continuous straight quay wall, it is desirable to allocate an appropriate number of
traffic lanes in order to provide a dedicated traffic lane for each crane. It is best if, n+1 traffic lanes are
provided to allow for overtaking and miscellaneous use, especially when multiple berths are provided
on the straight quay.
Typical average apron widths:
- 15 m to 20 m when ship to shore movements are carried out by ship’s gear
- 25 m to 30 m for mobile harbour cranes
- 40 m to 55 m for STS cranes with rail span of 15m to 20 m for low throughput terminals
- 55 m to 75 m for STS cranes of 30.48 m rail span and straddle carrier or tractor-trailer system
- 100 m to 120 m for perpendicular RMG system or AGV system
A few smaller container terminals have the berth on a jetty with no storage area behind the apron. In
these cases, the apron width has to be wide enough to place the hatch covers underneath or behind
the crane and to allow the transfer equipment to circulate.
If required, the quay can be equipped with one or more Ro-Ro ramps at the end of the quay wall.

3.5.3. Container Yard

Stacking Area Demand and Verification of Yard Throughput Capacity
For capacity calculations the following factors should be considered:
- Number of TEU ground slots (TGS)
- Nominal height for full stack utilisation (measured as the number of tiers of containers)
- Stack utilisation factor
- Stack sorting factor
- Dwell time, i.e. the time a container spends in the yard in days
- Number of days per year (365)
- Seasonal peaking factor: measures the variation of throughput in the peak month (or week)
compared to the average
- Vessel peaking factor: measures the variation of peak vessel call size compared to the average
- Transhipment %
There is no single formula in the literature that connects the total throughput of a terminal and the area
required for stacking. Miscellaneous formulas can be found in Atkins (1983), Dally (1983), Hoffmann
(1985), UNCTAD (1985), Frankel (1987), Dharmalingam (1987, pp. 27-31), Chen (1998, pp. 509-543)
and Itsuro (2001), Tsinker (2004), Thoresen (2005) and Ligteringen & Velsink (2012), among others.
A literature review [Chu and Huang, 2005] reveals that two approaches are generally applied to
calculate the handling capability of a container stacking area.
- One is obtained from the demand point of view connecting the number of containers handled per
year, and the land area needed for stacking, using the dwell time for various destinations of

62
 containers (import, export or transhipment), the storage density for the mode of operation system,
the height of the containers stacked and various peak factors.
- Another is obtained from the supply point of view, computes the number of containers a Container
Yard could accommodate annually on the basis of a how many TEU ground slots can fit in a certain
area, the working height, dwell times and various slot utilisation and sorting factors.
At the preliminary design and sizing stage of a project when the throughput forecast is available and
the planner needs to determine the required area, the demand approach is used. At the detailed
planning stage when layouts are drawn, the yard capacity is verified from the TEU slots that can fit in
the available area (supply approach).
The two approaches can be reconciled using queuing theory by the following general relationship
between throughput demand and required area:
Throughput demand x peak factor ≤ Stack Utilisation x TEU slot Capacity
or:
Throughput demand x peak factor ≤ Stack Utilisation x Area x Stacking Density x (365/dwell time)
Where:
- The throughput demand has accounted for the % of transhipment and restows, i.e. reflects only the
containers stored in the stacks. Transhipment containers are counted twice in berth throughput
calculations – once off the ship and once on the ship – but are counted only once in the yard capacity
calculations. For this reason, for terminals with a significant percentage of transhipment traffic the
yard capacity has to be corrected to be consistent with the quoted berth capacity, or reversely the
throughput demand has to be corrected to single count the transhipment containers.
- The peak factor is such that does not reflect an unlikely peak condition.
- Stack utilisation varies from 0.65-0.9, depending on the storage system and the acceptable service
(productivity) levels. Obviously, the fuller the stack, the more reshuffling is needed to reach a
container and the slower the productivity of the handling equipment.
- Stacking Density equals TGS/ha times working height.
- The working height (as opposed to nominal) usually incorporates various sorting factors, such as
the necessary empty slots at the top of the stack in order to be able to reach the containers at the
bottom. For example, a 6-wide, 5 high RTG bay must leave 4 empty slots at the top tier to reach
the first tier container. Therefore, the maximum practical storage height is 5 x 26/30 = 5 x 0.87 =
4.3 tiers.
- 365 by dwell time indicates the slot turnarounds in a year.
- Dwell times can be estimated from nearby operating terminals. Typical values of dwell time for
imported containers is roughly 6-7 days, 4-5 days for containers destined for export, while empty
containers usually remain in port about 10 to 20 days. Nonetheless, figures outside these ranges
do also occur; notably where empties are stored outside the terminal and on-terminal empty
container dwell times can be minimised (e.g. to 1-2 days).
Since each storage area in the yard (imports, exports, empties, reefers, etc.) can have a different
storage system, dwell time and sorting arrangement, they should be treated separately in the capacity
verification calculations.
When using a supply approach, based on the available area, the number of available TEU slots (static
storage capacity) can be estimated in two ways:
1. From the total yard area, by estimating the net storage area (usually 60-70 % of the total), apply a
shape correction factor to account for any irregularity in shape, and multiply by the appropriate
stacking density in TEU ground slots/hectare Table 3.13, depending on the stacking system.
2. From the overall yard layout drawing, by showing the TGS for each storage mode (imports, exports,
empties, reefers, etc.) and appropriate aisles and counting the TGS. This method is more accurate.

63
 Stacking System Nominal Height Typ. Width m2/TEU
Chassis 1 50-65
Forklift 2 2 19
3 2 13
Reach Stacker/Top Loader 2 2 30-40
3 2-3 20-30
4 6 18
Straddle Carriers 2 1 15-20
3 1 10-13
RMG/RTG/Empty Stacker 4 5-9 7.5-11
5 5-9 6-8

Table 3.12: Indicative stacking area requirements for different stacking systems
(Sources: Authors: Thoresen, UNCAD, Tsinker, Ligteringen & Velsink)

To determine the total number of ground slots the following factors should be considered:
- Maximum stack height for full utilisation (measured as the number of tiers of containers)
- Stack utilisation factor
- Stack sorting factor
 Dwell time
 Number of working days per year
 Seasonal peaking factor
 % of transhipment containers
The following should be noted:
- The storage height has to account for the number of empty slots at the top of a stack in order to be
able to reach the containers at the bottom. For example a 6 wide, 5 high container bay must leave
4 empty slots at the top tier in order to reach the first tier container. Therefore, the maximum practical
storage height is 5 X 26/30 = 4.3 tiers.
- Dwell times can be estimated from nearby operating terminals but in the absence of this information
5-10 days is normally assumed for full containers and 10-20 days for empty containers. These
ranges can vary particularly where empty containers are stored outside of the terminal area and in
such circumstances dwell times for full containers can be reduced considerably to as low as 1-2
days.

Reach Stacker
Reach stacker operations are in general very flexible and especially suitable for start-up phases of small
terminals. Flexible stacking blocks may be designed to cope with possible adjustments in the available
terminal area. The disadvantage of this system is its relatively low container stacking density.
Furthermore, reach stacker operations always require a uniform pavement which can cope with high
wheel loads.
Reach stackers are commonly used in combination with tractor-trailer transport systems. Thus, the
reach stacker may only operate in the container stacking area while the container will be transported to
the apron area using tractor-trailer units. In exceptional cases, e.g. when handling OOG containers, the
reach stacker may be allowed to move to the apron area.

64
Moreover, some terminals may use reach stackers for transferring containers to barges. This operation
is commonly only in terminals where the tidal range is insignificant The system can allow containers to
be handled up to 4 m below the quay apron onto a barge.
In general, reach stackers place containers in narrow blocks. Reach stackers are able to stack 3-4 rows
across and up to 5 tiers in height but in small terminals a typical stacking height of 2 is commonly used.
Figure 3.18 gives an example for reach stacker stacking capacities.

Figure 3.18: Typical stacking arrangement using reach stackers

The minimum space for operation of a reach stacker between the block stacks should be 16 m, but
more optimally 18 m. Ideally, internal tractor-trailers will have dedicated areas for transferring the
container to the reach stacker outside the operation area in the stacks. However, it is often unavoidable
that external lorries have to enter the stack area, in which case safety procedures should be given
special attention.
Straddle Carrier System
A typical layout for part of a container block is shown in Figure 3.19. The area includes the minimum
area for passages of the straddle carrier to handle containers in the block, but does not include the
width/area of the main passages in the yard to access the block. The clear width of aisles between rows
of stacked containers in the yard is usually required to be 1.4 to 1.5 m, but it should be checked with
reference to the dimensions of the particular straddle carrier. The clear distance between the ends of
containers in a row usually needs to be 0.15-0.30 m. If visual checks are required on containers at the
door ends, a minimum clear space should be increased as required.
For refrigerated containers (reefers), a clear distance of 1.2 m-1.5 m between the ends is usually
sufficient for the provision of electric power supply fittings and for handling electric plugs. The distance
should be increased slightly if they are stacked two or more high, as steel gantries are required for
working on and monitoring the upper layer(s). Nowadays nearly all reefers are 40’ in length and reefer
slots are designed for this size.
The turning radius (measured to the outer corners of the container) for a straddle carrier handling 20 ft
containers is 15 m and for handling 40 ft containers is 17 m. As 20 ft and 40 ft containers are generally
interspersed in the yard, the minimum turning radius and the minimum width for the main passages
should be based on 40 ft container handling.

65
 Figure 3.19: Typical straddle carrier stacking layout
Containers can be placed parallel or perpendicular to the quay. Both alignments are common and are
based on the module shown in Figure 3.19 above.
Figure 3.20 shows a typical marshalling yard layout with containers aligned parallel to the quay wall,
suitable for unidirectional over-passing operations by the straddle carriers. The depth l of a block of
rows of stacked containers should be as large as possible. A key in achieving a smooth and efficient
operation is the optimum number of blocks measured against the total length of the quay wall and the
number of container cranes operating on the quay. The width of the passages dividing the blocks
perpendicular to the quay wall should be D = 20 m for one-way traffic and Dc = 24 m - 26 m for two-way
traffic. The interchange slots are provided on the landside of these blocks.
When the containers are placed perpendicular to the quay wall, the dimensions of the blocks are less
important and their length depends on the terminal depth. Thus, the capacity of the blocks is usually
higher than in a parallel alignment.

66
 Figure 3.20: Typical layout of marshalling yard for straddle carrier system

Figure 3.20 shows the fundamental module for interchange ground slots in the SC handling system.
Interchange operations are the docking points of yard-use equipment – straddle carriers driven by
terminal operators – and road trucks operated by external drivers. From a safety point of view,
switchback operations are strongly recommended, i.e. the trailers are reversed into the slot on the land
side and the SCs move over it on the terminal side.
The dimensions shown in Figure 3.21 depend on the actual dimensions of the trailers and road trucks
to be used.

Figure 3.21: Interchange zone for straddle carrier terminal

67
RTG System
The most common sizes for RTG (Rubber Tyred Gantry) cranes are currently 6 + 1 or 7 + 1 spans and
lifting 1 over 5 or 6, where ‘6 + 1’ indicates that the crane spans 6 rows of containers and one road lane.
Adjacent to the road a second lane is required for vehicles to overtake those under the crane. This may
be provided at every stack row or at alternate stack rows, in which case the alternate rows are laid out
‘back-to-back’, so that they share the overtaking lane and thus save space. The back-to-back
arrangement results in a slightly greater stacking density but has the disadvantage that RTGs traversing
between rows will operate facing the opposite direction unless additional space is provided in the aisles
to allow them to swing round by 180°. Figure 3.22 shows a cross section of 6 + 1 RTGs with back-to-
back stacks.

Figure 3.22: Typical stacking arrangement for RTGs

For operational reasons, the optimum layout is for containers to be stacked parallel to the quay wall. A
layout where containers are arranged perpendicular to the quay wall should be avoided as far as
possible. Based on the fundamental module of the ground slots shown in Figure 3.22, a typical layout
of the marshalling yard of the RTG handling system is shown in Figure 3.23.
The length of the blocks (the length of the rows of stacked containers) should in general be 20-30 TEU
(125-190 m), so a 300-350 m berth container terminal handling Post-Panamax vessels will typically
have two blocks per berth. When relatively few RTGs are allocated to the yard, the block length may
need to be shortened to allow for the higher frequency of changing rows.
The ground slots should be laid out to suit both 20 ft and 40 ft containers, with provision for 45 ft
containers. This is particularly applicable if concrete ground beams are used.
Typical RTG spans are 23 to 24 m for 6 + 1 machines and 26 m to 27 m for 7 + 1 machines. Adjacent
RTG runways should be spaced at about 6 m centres where an overtaking lane is provided between
them or at 3m to 4 m centres between back-to-back cranes.
The width of the aisles and at the ends of the yard in Figure 3.21 should be sufficient for tractor/trailers
and road lorries to turn into and out of the stack roads and may range from 20 m to 32 m. The larger
68
dimension is required where RTGs change rows frequently and allows for the overall crane length of
12 m to 13 m.
Traffic flows of both yard use and public road vehicles in the marshalling yard should as far as possible
be unidirectional in either a clockwise or anti-clockwise direction the interests of efficiency and safety.

Figure 3.23: Typical stacking layout for RTGs

RMG System
The Rail Mounted Gantry (RMG) crane storage system is based on cranes that move on fixed rail tracks.
The crane is electrically-powered and can achieve high gantry trolley and hoist speeds. As a storage
system it can achieve the highest storage density, utilising about 90 % of the available storage TEU
slots. However, its main advantage is that most of the crane’s functions can be automated, needing
only remote operators who can handle a number of cranes at the same time by computer control. The
automated RMG crane goes by the name Automated Stacking Crane (ASC). On the downside, the
RMG storage system requires significant up-front investment in infrastructure and equipment compared
to non-automated systems, the rails have low settlement and transverse tolerances and the cranes
have relatively high power demand.
In relation to the berth, there are two main stack layouts:
- with the stacks perpendicular to the berth (Figure 3.24)
- with the stacks parallel to the berth (Figure 3.25)

69
 Figure 3.24: End-loaded perpendicular RMG layout

Figure 3.25: Side-loaded parallel RMG layout

Depending on where the horizontal transport is feeding the stacking cranes there are the following
configurations:
- End-loaded stacks, where the container is brought for loading/unloading at transfer zones at the
two ends of the stack, as shown in Figure 3.26.
- Side-loaded stacks, where the container is brought for loading/unloading on a lane parallel to the
long dimension of the stacks, similar to RTG operations. Usually the hoisting of the container to/from
the horizontal transport is done from a cantilevered beam outside of the rail, which requires the
crane length to be sufficient for the longest containers to pass between the legs. See Figure 3.27
below.
Currently, the most frequently used layouts are the end-loaded perpendicular and the side-loaded
parallel layouts.

70
 Figure 3.26: End-loaded RMG crane, land-side transfer zone at CTA, Germany
(Source: ABB)

Simulation studies have shown that the parallel stacking is less sensitive to transhipment, especially
with transhipment ratios above 70 %. This is because all cranes on a stack row can work to serve the
waterside demand. On the other hand, for terminals with a large proportion of gateway cargo the
perpendicular RMG layout is considered to be more efficient. An additional advantage of perpendicular
end-loaded stacking is that the waterside horizontal transport operations can be easily separated from
the landside operations, which makes for a safer operation. By contrast, the side-loaded parallel layout
has always a mix of waterside and landside traffic on the corridors between the stacks, although they
can be segregated between the two crane cantilevers.
Although it is possible to automate RMGs in the parallel mode it is more common to do so with the
RMGs perpendicular to the quay.
A particular characteristic of the RMG yard arrangement is that yard productivity (number of ‘hooks’)
and yard capacity (number of TEU slots) are related. This is because every stack row has a dedicated
number of cranes on it and the number of stacks is decided based on the required water-side and land-
side productivity. The dimensions of the stacks are based on the required number of TEU slots taking
into account the crane travelling speeds.

71
 Figure 3.27: Cantilever RMG cranes at HIT, Hong Kong

The main geometric decisions that have to be taken in order to lay out a perpendicular RMG stacking
yard are as below but for parallel stacks some of these factors would need to be modified:
- Length of stacks: usually between 30 and 40 TEU long. Shorter stacks reduce the RMG travelling
distance, hence decrease the cycle time at the expense of fewer TEU slots.
- Width of stacks: usually between 8 and 10 containers wide.
- Height of stacks: usually 5 or 6 high.
- Buffer size of the transfer zones: usually 3-5 lanes. Additional space has to be provided so that
when one RMG crane is in maintenance position the other crane can pick containers from the zone.
- The lane width between the adjacent RMG cranes. Alternate lanes should allow access for
maintenance staff and the minimum spacing should allow for the adjacent cranes’ E-boxes
(electrical equipment) not to collide.
- The location of the reefer racks in the stacks and the personnel access. The reefer stacks can be
located in the middle of the stack for equidistant access by the two RMGs, in which case personnel
access is provided from the side, or they can be located at the landside end of the stack to allow
access from the end of the stack.
Figure 3.28 shows a cross section of an end-loaded perpendicular stack arrangement.

72
 Figure 3.28: Example of end-loaded perpendicular RMG stack arrangement

The RMG stacks can be combined with one of the following means of horizontal transport:
- Tractor-trailer (TT) unit, manned
- Automated guided vehicle (AGV), automated
- Shuttle carrier, manned or possibly automated
- Automated lifting vehicle (ALV), automated
- Lift AGV/Cassette system, automated
Each of these systems has different geometric characteristics (length, width, turning radius) and the
transfer zones and apron have to be designed according to their requirements.
Where an automated horizontal transport system is contemplated there are some additional
considerations that have to be included:
- It is beneficial to have an (automated) secondary trolley on the quay crane and a platform between
the legs, serving as a buffer between the manned (from ship to platform) and unmanned (from
platform to the ground) operations.
- Automated horizontal transport needs a system to aid its positioning and movement, such as
transponders, reflectors, etc. The positioning equipment will need to be integrated with the rest of
the infrastructure without conflicts.

Container Ground Slots

Yards for laden containers are marked out in twenty-foot ground slots (TGS) or forty-foot ground slots
(FGS). The slot size required depends on the need for personnel access to the container doors,
positioning tolerances and ease of access by the stacking equipment, which in turn is affected by the
inclination of the stack if the paving has a drainage slope. In general, an average clear gap between
adjacent containers of 30 cm to 45 cm (12 in to 18 in) may be sufficient.
For areas of block stacked empty containers the clear gaps may be reduced to 10 cm to 20cm (4 to 8
in), and surface markings may be omitted.

73
3.5.4. Reefer Stacks
Refrigerated (reefer) containers require connection to an electrical power supply to maintain the function
of their integral refrigeration plants whilst stored in the container terminal.
In small terminals with low reefer volumes the reefers may be stored at ground level but in most cases
space limitations will require them to be stacked and multi-level access platforms or gantries should be
provided at every storage bay to accommodate the electrical power sockets, as well as for manually
plugging and unplugging the reefers. The height of the reefer stacks depends on the general type of
operation. In medium-sized terminals heights of up to 4 are common but they may be higher.
Electrical connections are located at one or both sides of the reefer gantries. The distance between the
gantries is typically designed for 40 ft containers plus a minimum safety distance of 50 cm (20 in) at
each end. Figure 29 illustrates the standard arrangement of a stack.

Figure 3.29: Reefer stack: layout example

3.5.5. Security and Customs Facilities

The level of security and customs inspections required for both inbound and outbound containers varies
from terminal to terminal. In some cases a high percentage of containerised cargo is stripped (emptied)
from the container for physical inspection by customs and security personnel and a large dedicated
area is required. In other terminals the physical inspection is limited to a small number of containers
and a small ‘turn out area’ is sufficient. In addition, provision is required for X-raying containers both in
and out of the terminal. This can be carried out using mobile or fixed X-ray equipment.

3.5.6. Gate
The gate facilities are usually divided into an entrance or receiving gate for trucks entering and a
separate exit gate for trucks exiting the terminal. The number of entrance and exit lanes required is
determined by the predicted level of traffic for the terminal.
Many modern terminals using AEIS (Automatic Equipment Identification System, standardised by
ISO/TC 104/SC 04/WG 02 ‘AEI for containers and container related equipment’) have an entrance gate
of the pre-gate system type (see Figure 3.30). The pre-gate system divides the gate procedure into two
parts and reduces the required time at the gate itself and consequently reduces the number of required
lanes and site area:
- At position 1 (pre-check) the necessary information such as booking numbers is exchanged
between a clerk located in a control room and the driver of the truck, using an electronic device. An
AEIS reader puts the container into the terminal’s computer system.

74
- After this the truck is driven to the gatehouse (position 2) where remaining gate procedures such
as exchange of documents is carried out.

Figure 3.30: Layout of gate facilities

Figure 3.30 shows the layout of a gate arrangement having the entrance and the exit gate adjacent to
each other. An effective way of resolving peak traffic conditions at the gate can be achieved by providing
convertible (reversible) lanes that can be used as an entrance or exit. This arrangement results in a
wider gate because the entrance and exit gates have to be next to each other. A narrower gate can be
achieved by having separate entrance and exit lanes at some distance from each other.
On very busy terminals the classification of gate-in and gate-out traffic is can be segregated into lanes
for vehicles with stuffed or with empty containers to take into account the different gate procedures
involved. Completely separate gates may be provided for empty containers.
The required number of traffic lanes at the gate is obtained from the number of containers passing
through the gate, based on the pattern of receiving and delivering containers. The specified numbers
of traffic lanes may be based on queuing methodology for vehicle traffic.

75
Critical dimensions for the space requirements of the gates are shown in Table 3.13 In addition to
regular width lanes of at least 3.4 m to 3.5 m, the terminal gate needs to have one inbound and one
outbound over-wide lane for Out–of-Gauge (OOG) cargo, at a width of 5.6 m to 6.1 m.

Component Dimension (m)

Width of queuing lanes, pre-check

3.4-3.5
lanes, inspection lanes and exit lanes

Scales width 3.4

Clear height under canopy 5.6

Over-wide lanes width 5.6-6.1

Table 3.13: Critical gate dimensions

Sufficient queuing space for vehicles waiting to enter the terminal should be provided in front of an
entrance gate to avoid the line of waiting vehicles reaching the public or port road network. Sufficient
space has to be provided for in-gate vehicle slots and the calculation of the necessary queuing space
can be based on queuing theory. Depending on the criterion used, the queuing space can be based on
the expected number of vehicles queuing (average length of queue), the expected number of vehicles
conditional on a non-empty server, or the length of queue with a non-exceedance probability of (say)
85 %.
On the terminal side, crossing of in-gate and out-gate vehicle traffic flows should be strictly prohibited.
Enough space has to be allowed to avoid congestion among the vehicles having finished the in-gate
procedure and those going to the exit gate.
There are usually two ways to form queues of vehicles at multi-lane gates. In the so-called ‘common’
arrangement one single lane is formed and the vehicle at the front goes to the first lane which becomes
free, on a ‘first come-first served’ basis. An alternative way is to form a separate or independent queue
for each lane, described as ‘separate’ arrangement.
A gate complex is sized so that it can accommodate the peak hourly truck traffic within a reasonable
level of total time for the number of trucks. A commonly accepted turnaround time for a truck is 45
minutes to 1 hour. Out of this time the trucks are expected to spend 30 minutes in the terminal picking
up or dropping off a container. One criterion for an acceptable service level at the gate itself is 15
minutes when the gate is at capacity. The most influential factor in the gate sizing calculation is the
administrative time required, so every effort has to be taken to minimise this time in order to reduce the
required queuing space. Another factor that influences the size of the gate is the level of peak hourly
traffic. Busy terminals try to modulate their traffic by demanding that trucks that coming to the terminal
have a pre-arranged booked appointment, in order to limit the maximum number of trucks per hour.
On many terminals the entrance gate and the exit gate are at different sides of the terminal so that the
trucks flows are in one direction. This layout has advantages with regard to safety and operation, but
requires more space to accommodate two link roads to the main external road system.
The practice at some terminals is to provide a waiting area for trucks after they have passed through
the in-gate. This can help to avoid queuing on the access road but it takes up valuable terminal space
and should be avoided if possible.
Another facility that may be provided at the entrance gate complex is a trouble resolution area, where
trucks that have significant exceptions (e.g. faulty or no paperwork) exit the gate queue and enter a
designated area to the side so that they do not block the remainder of the traffic.

76
The above-mentioned functions of the gate refer to the operations of the container terminal, i.e.
collecting information about the container number, the bill of lading, etc. The terminal gate often has to
provide space to accommodate additional port functions, such as:
- Port Security and ISPS compliance. The requirement is to verify the identity of anyone entering or
exiting the terminal through the demarcation (usually a fence) between the port and terminal areas
of responsibility.
- Radiation Detection to incoming and outgoing containers. This check is accomplished by special
mobile or fixed equipment called Radiation Portal Monitors.
- Customs inspections. Usually, an area near the exit gate has to be set aside for the customs officials
to be able to selectively inspect the interior of incoming containers for contraband and collect the
customs duty. In many terminals in the developing world the customs inspection procedure is time
consuming and results often in a bottleneck in the flow of containers and in such cases separate
facilities should be provided. It is likely that X-ray equipment will also be required.
- Reefer and agriculture inspections which requires an area to be set aside similar to the Customs
inspection above.
- Port health inspections.
- Weighbridge: one or more of these may be required for a variety of reasons such as verifying cargo
weights or checking for vehicle weights that exceed highway limits.
- Damage inspections. It is normal to have either gantries or cameras incorporated in the gate
complex for the general external inspection of containers for insurance purposes.

3.5.7. Rail Yard

As in the container terminal yard itself, there is a choice of equipment suitable for loading/unloading the
rail cars (wagons):
- Reach stackers
- Straddle carriers
- RTGs
- RMGs
Where an RTG or RMG is used the containers have to be transported from the stacking yard to the rail
yard and vice versa by terminal tractor-trailers or (if the transit distance is not too long) by straddle
carriers.
The width of the area for the landside operation and the rail yard depends on the:
- Width between stacking yard and rail tracks (landside operation, e.g. road for external trucks driving
to the chassis site and truck parking places)
- Number of tracks required (depends on the throughput and modal split of the terminal)
- Width of the buffer zone for containers to be loaded on the rail wagons or for unloaded containers
to be transported to the stacking yard
In small terminals with only one or two tracks and a small buffer zone, the overall width for the required
pavement for vehicles and buffer may be as little as 30 m.
In larger terminals, typically 40 m is the distance from the stacking yard to the tracks and 40 m to 50 m
from the tracks to the landside terminal boundary are considered ideal.
The gauge of the tracks, measured between the inside edges of the rails (Figure 3.29), varies
throughout the world (see
Table 2.1).
The minimum curve radius of the tracks depends on the technical standards of the country of the port
location, e.g. in Germany 190 m for freight trains.

77
 Figure 3.31: Definition of rail gauge

The centre-to-centre distance between the tracks depends on the gauge and the technical standards
of the country in which the port is located, e.g. in Germany it is 4.5 m within a station, but in the rail yard
of a container terminal it is usually 5.0 m.
In the case of medium sized terminals with significant volumes of cargo being transported by rail to the
same hinterland destination, block trains (a train in which all the rail cars are moved from the same
origin to the same destination, without being split up or stored en route) are assembled. The length of
a block train can be 700-800 m or more, but may also be considerably shorter: and the maximum train
length depends on the specifications of the individual country/-ies in which they operate.
Railways carry 40' ISO containers on either flat wagons or well cars. The ‘well’ is a depressed section
which sits close to the rails between the wheel trucks of the car, allowing a container to be carried lower
than on a traditional flat car making it possible to carry a stack of two containers per unit on railway lines
where the bridges have sufficient head clearance. This system is used extensively in North America
and Australia. In India, flat cars are now being used to carry double stacked containers.
Typically an on-dock rail terminal (i.e. one that is located within the terminal) will have the following
types of track:
- Arrival/departure track that has to be free at all times except when a train is ready to depart
- Working tracks where the train is stripped/loaded of the containers
- Run around track so that the locomotive can disconnect from the train and return to the main
arrival/departure track
- Storage tracks where wagons or train segments can be stored if no working track is available
Figures 3.32 and 3.33 show the loading/unloading of containers on/off the rail wagons by reach stacker
and straddle carrier, respectively. In Figure 3.34 containers are loaded/unloaded by an RMG crane
while straddle carriers transport the containers to/from the rail yard. The RMGs should be equipped
with cantilever(s) for lifting containers to/from the road area. For operational reasons, when using
straddle carriers the containers are placed at an angle of 45° to the alignment of the tracks and the
RMGs should be equipped with a rotating hook. Where terminal tractor-trailers are used for the delivery
and pick-up of the containers in the rail yard, the slots are usually arranged parallel to the rail track.

78
Figure 3.32: Loading/Unloading of rail wagons by reach stacker

Figure 3.33: Loading/Unloading of rail wagons by straddle carrier

79
 Figure 3.34: Loading/Unloading of rail wagons by RMG crane,
containers being delivered/picked up by straddle carriers
(Photo courtesy of HHLA, Germany)

3.6. Buildings and Ancillary Facilities

3.6.1. Introduction
This section contains a summary of the buildings and ancillary facilities required to operate small and
medium marine container terminals.
While it is preferable to use permanent buildings, it may be appropriate to use temporary/portable
facilities, for example to facilitate a rapid start-up, to minimise initial cost or to provide flexibility for
terminal restructuring or reorganisation. In such cases, the design must allow for the later conversion
to permanent facilities without any significant disruption to the smooth running of the terminal.
Except for those with a specific function related to the quay or container stacks, the buildings and
facilities described in this section should be located outside the container handling areas. Other port
users should not be permitted to enter a terminal without an escort for security and safety reasons.
An overall requirement for the design of all terminals and their ancillary facilities is that the requirements
of the ISPS Code should be observed. Security arrangements are covered in Section 4.8.

3.6.2. Administration/Operations Building

In general, it is preferable to group the offices of all organisations involved in the terminal operations
within a main office block. Although there are various situations where this may not necessarily be
appropriate, the use of a single multi-storey building can help to minimise use of land and reduce the
distances between offices.
Situations in which separate buildings may be more suitable include where the terminal is developed
within an existing port and other organisations already have sufficient office space, or where the
functions of government bodies (e.g. port health, customs, etc.) are likely to involve large numbers of
transactions that could interfere with the general activities of the main offices.
Although there are many examples of alternative locations, the administrative operations building is
generally best located outside the secure terminal area and either close to or on the perimeter of the
terminal. This means the staff and visitors to the building are kept out of the operational area and
security is a matter for the building administration.

80
The principal user of the building will be the terminal operator, for their management and operational
functions.
Depending on its location in relation to the terminal, the control room, where all terminal operations and
functions are directed and monitored, should be sited on the top floor to give the best overall view of
the container yard. Some operators prefer to locate their operations offices within the terminal, which
may be an advantage in small to medium terminals where the whole facility can be viewed from a well-
placed control room.
The terminal will be required to be equipped with a computer controlled container management system
that monitors all activities within the terminal and linked to the Port Management Information System to
facilitate the speedy clearance of containers and supply information to the finance department.
Another function within the remit of the operator is that of security and the offices responsible for security
of personnel entering and leaving the terminal (in addition to personnel using the building) may also be
included on the ground floor of the building if it is located adjacent to the pedestrian gate.
Facilities should also be provided, in this building or possibly in a separate building, for a pre-clearance
gate office and one or more banks, where shipping agents will clear containers for transit through the
gate and make payments, together with other users such as shipping lines, shipping agents and
Government agencies.
Parking spaces for terminal staff and visitors should be provided on the public side of the building (i.e.
outside the ISPS-limit) and parking on the operational side should be limited to key terminal operations
staff only.

3.6.3. Canteen and Amenities

Canteen facilities for all office and yard-based personnel and changing and washing facilities for
terminal operatives are normally provided in a separate building having one or two floors, but may
alternatively be wholly or partly incorporated in the administration block.
The kitchen will require a separate external vehicular access for deliveries of catering supplies.
Changing rooms equipped with showers and lockers should be provided for all yard personnel.
The terminal should include a medical centre providing first aid facilities, together with an ambulance.
This may be incorporated in the amenity block or in a separate building.
Small blocks with toilet and shelter facilities should be provided for the use of terminal personnel at
strategic points around the terminal.

3.6.4. Maintenance Facilities

The maintenance facilities required will include a well-equipped workshop with sufficient space to work
on approximately 10 % of the mobile equipment and spreaders at any one time. They should be located
outside but close to the container yard.
Refer to Chapter 5 for further details.

3.6.5. Handling of Leaking and Hazardous Containers

Leaking containers may be temporarily stored in concrete lined pits located away from the main stacking
areas. Leakers should be transported using a special tanked trailer, which may also be used to store
the box as an interim measure. Provision of special areas within the general stacks may also be
considered.
Although IMDG (International Maritime Code for Dangerous Goods) containers (i.e. those containing
hazardous materials) will generally be stored at readily accessible locations in the main stacks, a secure
compound for certain classes may also be provided.

81
Storage for both leakers and IMDG containers may require a canopy for weather protection and a fire
fighting system. The canopy clearances should be sufficient to enable the containers to be handled with
the terminal equipment.

3.6.6. Customs/Agricultural Inspection Facilities

At most terminals, there will be a requirement for the contents of a number of containers to be inspected
by the customs authorities and/or health inspectors. This would generally be at a location inside the
security fence and between the container yard and the exit gate. The proportion of containers requiring
inspection should be discussed with the customs/port health authorities, unless there is an existing
similar terminal nearby from which the requirements can be estimated.
Inspections will take the form of either a simple tailboard inspection, which may take only a few minutes,
to a full turn out of all of the contents of the container for a more thorough inspection. This may take a
number of hours depending on the requirements and ease of handling the contents of the container. A
low-mast fork lift truck is normally used for this operation.
To facilitate these inspections, a raised, covered platform (dock leveller) should be provided so that
when containers are delivered to the inspection area on a trailer, the doors will be at the same level as
the platform. If the containers to be inspected are moved using terminal tractor-trailers to and from the
stack, a fixed platform may be suitable. If, however, this operation is to be performed on the road trucks
on exit from the terminal; dock levellers will be required to cater for the range of chassis heights.
The customs facilities should include a secure shed for impounded goods with direct access from the
platform. Inside the shed there will be a caged area where goods of high value or prohibited goods can
be left in a secure environment, as well as offices and amenities for customs staff. If health inspections
are needed a separate facility will be needed with its own offices and amenities.
The customs facilities may also include X-ray or gamma ray inspection bays for additional inspection
capabilities and a lorry weighbridge. In some countries, the yard area may require space for inspection
of the seals on inbound containers that were not already inspected, before they leave the terminal.

3.6.7. CFS Facilities

CFSs (container freight stations) are mainly used to receive small cargo consignments from individual
consignors that are too small to form a ‘full container load’ (FCL) and to pack them together with other
‘less than container load’ (LCL) consignments to consolidate the contents of containers that are to be
shipped. CFSs also perform the reverse function by receiving and unpacking landed containers before
the contents are transported to their consignees. The packing and unpacking operations are commonly
referred to as ‘stuffing’ and ‘unstuffing’ or ‘de-stuffing’.
In principle, CFS facilities should be located outside of the terminal area as this both reduces the land
area requirements in the yard area and the numbers of vehicles and personnel needing access. It also
avoids potential conflict between terminal and non-terminal activities. However, there may be good
reasons to include some CFS facilities in the terminal if, for example, there is sufficient space and/or
there is an existing building suitable for this purpose. In some countries, the customs and/or port
authorities prohibit LCL shipments from leaving the terminal or port area in containers. In addition,
where there is a large imbalance between imports and exports and a high risk that empty containers
will not be recovered, some lines require FCL containers to be processed at a CFS within the terminal
or port.
CFS facilities where provided inside the terminal will be serviced using tractor-trailer units for moves
to/from the terminal and by road trucks for the inland leg. Therefore, the CFS should be located at the
terminal boundary, with segregation of the sea-side and inland activities as well as measures to prevent
the trucks from entering the secure terminal area.
CFSs should be built in a secure area with boundary wall/fence and fully controlled gates similar to the
terminal itself.

82
3.6.8. Other Facilities
Depending on the needs of its customers, the availability of land and the commercial aspects, the
terminal may also consider providing some or all of the following ancillary facilities:
- container repairs
- preparation of reefer containers
- veterinary inspection office
However, none of these should take priority over the main functions of the terminal and should in general
be sited outside it, especially when space is limited.

3.7. Terminal Operating System

3.7.1. Functions
In order to maximise terminal performance and operational efficiency it will be necessary to install a
computerised terminal operating system (TOS). The information from a TOS is used by terminal
operators to optimise the use of equipment at the quayside and within the container yard. It can also be
used for managing terminals’ business transactions, including gate operations, finance, accounting and
management reports as well as terminal productivity.
A real-time TOS provides up-to-date information on events throughout the terminal and can provide
measures of productivity gains, lost time on cranes or in the yard and can react immediately to any
exceptional events.
Using up to the minute information planners can quickly and easily determine the best way to optimise
terminal use through yard allocation and vessel loading plans together with optimisation of labour and
equipment resources.
The TOS can help eliminate wasted yard space, unnecessary container and equipment moves, lost
containers and excessive dwell times.
This is achieved through use of a detailed graphic visualisation of the yard equipment activity, vessel
stowage and berth space, which is monitored in real time with the ability to change options at any time.
The TOS can automatically assign gangs and cranes to vessels, sequence the cranes and track their
productivity in real-time. It can also predict vessel load and discharge times and can alert the operator
to events which might affect service commitments, such as time-sensitive customer delivery or
transhipment to another vessel.
The system can usefully generate an automated stow plan and will consider the trade-off between
vessel and yard efficiency such as the impact of RMG/RTG crane movements and lane changes and
the effects associated with retrievals from more remote parts of the container yard.
TOS system should be capable of offering the following:
Yard Planning and Control can include:
- detailed yard model and real-time views
- utilisation and maintenance reporting
- flexible allocations for yard planning and equipment utilisation
- automated tracking and notification of planning errors

Vessel Planning and Control can include:

- advanced stowage validation
- real-time tracking of ship planning execution

83
3.7.2. Gate to Quay Operations
A full TOS system integrates the entire terminal operation enabling the planning of containers directly
from the gate to/from the vessel or rail. Through the optimisation of the logistics flow through the terminal
it is possible to promote rapid movement of containers between the gate and quayside, reduce dwell
times in the yard and the turn round times of vessels.
The speed of gate traffic can set the pace for the entire terminal operation and the system should be
able to utilise a broad range of Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) formats. This should include a pre-
advice and pre-booking capability which enables gate clerks to simply confirm rather than create
records through use of data entry screens for each new gate transaction.
Industry trends in world port communities now reflect significant advances in electronic communications
to assist in addressing the issues of port congestion and service expansion. These technologies include:
- Local community electronic communications infrastructures
- Pagers and Smartcard technologies to speed the movement of vehicles in and out of the port
In combination these technologies can assist in strengthening port security.
Relevant benchmarks for the capacity of container berths suggest productivity levels in excess of 30
moves per crane per hour. Such efficiency can only be achieved with the implementation of appropriate
information technology and an efficient and effective TOS.
If the requirements of Customs operations have to be deferred until a later stage, provision for these
should be borne in mind in the development of the terminal gate systems.

3.7.3. Labour and Equipment Resources

Many terminals implement simple systems for the operational servicing of quay cranes that result in the
under utilisation of container handling equipment leading to longer travel distances, un-laden travel and
delays.
Because a TOS operates in real time it is possible to track actual container handling equipment, crane
activity and productivity. Additionally, the TOS dispatches work orders to radio data terminals (RDTs),
which so drivers do not have to wait for work instructions. Any changes are automatically dispatched
assuring drivers they are making strategic moves, saving time and allowing them to concentrate on
driving and not on trying to anticipate the next move.
Labour and equipment resources can be properly scheduled which in turn reduces idle time, increases
equipment utilisation and provides better scheduling of labour. The exact manning level will depend on:
- the type of yard equipment used
- the shift pattern: single/double/triple shift

3.7.4. Terminal Tractor Utilisation

In most RMG and RTG operations each tractor is dedicated to a single crane with tractors dispatched
on a first-come, first-served basis, travelling laden in one direction and returning empty in the other.
This inefficient method of operation creates an excessive demand on tractors to match yard capacity to
the high productivity level at the quayside.
A TOS can be used to reduce travel and waiting time by pooling tractors across a wide array of potential
work assignments and will then optimally match available tractors to available work in real-time. For
example, if a tractor that has just unloaded at the quay is close to another crane discharging a vessel,
it can proceed directly to the second crane instead of returning to the yard empty.
This results in fewer tractors doing the same amount of work, thus lowering capital costs, as well as
variable costs such as labour, fuel and maintenance.
For terminal tractors the TOS should contain the following:
- Automated and optimised dispatch

84
- Pooling across multiple diverse operations

3.7.5. Quayside Crane Utilisation

The TOS should provide a fully graphic interface for creating and managing a vessel crane programme,
which includes the start and finish time for each crane and realistic work sequences. The tool should
also double as a real time monitor of vessel work in progress, tracking of productivity, adjusting
load/discharge time estimates for each container and generating automatic crane sequences.

3.7.6. Hazardous Goods

The TOS should have the ability to track multiple hazardous class codes and UN numbers per container
and be able to alert operators with visual and audible warnings if planned moves generate segregation
conflicts in accordance with full IMDG rules or specific customer requirements.

3.7.7. Reefer Monitoring

A TOS should ideally be compatible with hand held equipment and provide an interface for monitoring
reefer temperature, vents, humidity, oxygen and carbon monoxide information. It also automatically
sends plug/unplug notices and alerts reefer personnel when to carry out planned maintenance.

3.7.8. TOS Reports

The TOS will contain powerful real time querying, listing and recapping functions with flexibility to
instantly access all container information.
For instance, this should include the ability to list all export reefers by yard location, recap port and
vessel destination and identify the heaviest containers and see them graphically depicted in the
container yard.
Furthermore, reports generated by the system should also provide detailed productivity analysis of the
following:
- individual tractor productivity
- overall tractor productivity
- utilisation breakdown, e.g. idle time, travelling empty and full and waiting time
- distance travelled and travel time empty and full
- waiting at an RMG or RTG
- travel to quay crane with a container
- waiting at a quay crane with a container
- see if quay crane is ahead or behind schedule
- set the maximum number of tractors to be sent to each crane
- set the rate to prioritise a specific quay crane

3.7.9. Managing Terminal Business Transactions

In order to gain more functionality from the main database information the TOS should incorporate the
ability to provide management functions such as automatic bookings, invoicing, data exchange and
reporting all of which capture the complete history of all transactions and work.
Even at some modern terminals, services are often not invoiced because work instructions are
handwritten or issued verbally and completed work orders fail to get posted to accounting. An automatic
system contained within the TOS puts an end to the paper shuffle and verbal orders by tracking invoices
for services and automatically sharing the data with the main financial accounting system of the
company.
To this end, it is suggested the infrastructure should be designed to allow for the provision of software
to manage both UN/EDIFACT and AINSI X.12 EDI conventions to simplify, standardise and harmonise

85
procedures. This will lead to a reduction in paperwork, faster processing of data and more accurate and
reliable real-time information.

3.7.10. Finance and Accounting Systems

As with any business it is essential to have an appropriate finance and accounting computer system.
This has to be tailored to the needs of the business but it is imperative that the system is compatible
with the chosen TOS system in order that EDI can be efficiently exchanged between the two systems.
The system must have the capability of dealing with internal finance such as wages and salaries and
the cost of consumables as well as external billing to shipping lines, other customers and tenants
including services such as the metering and usage of water supplied to vessels.

3.7.11. Information Via the Web

The growth of the World Wide Web has changed the expectations and the way people require access
to information.
Container terminals have been behind in providing information by this method and those that do
generally only offer vessel schedules and basic container inquiries.
An efficient web-based system provides all parties across the shipping and container industry including
shipping lines, trucking companies, shippers, agents and Government agencies with a web browser
interface for accessing a wealth of transaction data that was previously inaccessible from outside of the
terminal.
A good system can provide customers with 24/7 access to real-time container information, load and
discharge lists, reports and stow plans.
It is recommended that ports give consideration to the installation of such a system for any proposed
container terminal.

86
4. CIVIL WORKS DESIGN ASPECTS
4.1. Introduction
This section sets out the main civil/structural engineering considerations when designing a container
terminal and describes the most common solutions. The following sub-sections are presented:
- design life
- berth structure
- quay apron
- yard area
- buildings and ancillary facilities
- utilities
- security and safety issues

4.2. Design Life

The total design life depends on but is not limited to the following factors:
- The design standards and recommendations used
- The suitability of the materials used for the environment in which the structure is situated
- The construction of the structure and the supervision to ensure the work is done properly
- Proper inspection of the structures, e.g. every third or fifth year and maintenance and repair of any
damages following inspection
The required design life of a structure, which is taken to be equal to the useful life of the structure with
planned maintenance, can greatly influence the structural design and associated costs. A typical design
life for berth structures in ports is 50 years. A life of 30 years is sometimes used as modern specialised
cargo handling is more subject to rapid development, which may lead to early outdating of the berth
facilities, e.g. the influence of the container handling technology on the berth structure. For shore
protection works and breakwaters a design life of 100 years and for flood protection works a design life
of more than 100 years, will normally be appropriate.
The pavement design life varies depending on projected traffic volume and loading. In addition to the
selection of appropriate design life, a preservation and rehabilitation strategy is also designed to provide
satisfactory performance of the pavement during serviceable life. Surfacing may require periodic
rehabilitation to remedy deterioration of the functional performance parameters, i.e. roughness and
rutting, within the design period.
The average length of the economic life for the terminal structures and equipment will be heavily
influenced by the maintenance regime including the frequency, thoroughness and expenditure on
maintenance. As a very rough guideline the typical values in
Table 4.1 can be used as an indicator.

Typical design life

Terminal components First major maintenance (after installation)
(years)
Quay structure 50 25 years for cathodic protection (if applicable)
Fenders 20-25 10-15 years for painting/rubber replacement
Pavement 25 10-15 years
Buildings 50 20-30 years

Table 4.1: Typical design life for terminal components

87
4.3. Quay Structure
The purpose of a quay structure is mainly to provide a vertical front where ships can berth safely, to
allow the berth to be dredged to the required depth and to retain the fill behind.
Quay fronts are generally constructed according to one of the following two main principles:
Solid quay structure: the fill is extended right out to the quay front where a vertical wall is constructed
to resist the horizontal load from the fill and live loads on the apron. Solid quay structures can be divided
into two main groups:
- Gravity wall structure. The front wall of the structure with its own dead weight and bottom friction
will be able or self-sufficient to resist all anticipated loadings. Gravity wall types include: block wall,
caisson, counterfort, double-wall sheet pile and sheet piled cell.
- Steel sheet pile or concrete diaphragm wall structure. This wall type has minimal lateral capacity
and must often be anchored to an anchoring plate, wall, block or rock behind the quay. These
structures may also incorporate a relieving platform with or without a void beneath it in order to
reduce the loading from the fill.
Open quay structure: the open quay structure is constructed in front of a slope that is created either
by fill material or dredging. The slope is generally armoured to prevent degradation from wave attack
and the structure in front and above the slope typically comprises a reinforced concrete slab deck
supported on tubular steel or reinforced concrete piling. A solid wall may be used at the top and/or
bottom of the slope, for example, to contain the fill and/or to reduce the width of the deck. In poor soils
the structure may be built at some distance from the shore and connected to it with piled access bridges.
In selecting the technically and economically most favourable type, the following factors should be
considered:
- Berth structures should be designed and constructed to safely resist the loads caused by cargo
loads, trucks, cranes, ship impacts, mooring line loads, wind, fill behind the structure, anticipated
seismic movement, etc.
- Geotechnical conditions of the site
- Local availability of materials and contractor capabilities
- Hydrological and environmental impacts of the structures
Some examples of quay wall structures are provided in
Table 4.2.

88
 Type of structure Description Example

Solid quay Only applicable in good

structures – Block load bearing soils
wall

Solid quay Only applicable in good

structures - Caisson load bearing soils

Solid quay Vertical quay structure to

structures – Sheet be combined with various
pile/ diaphragm wall anchor and slab systems;
good adaptation to local
subsoil variations
possible.

Open quay structure Constructed on piles,

usually in open waters.
Advantages may include
lower impacts on the
hydraulic regime and
reduction in dredging
works.

Table 4.2: Some examples of quay structures

For the design of these structures the following references are recommended:
- NAVFAC (US Navy)
- British Standards (United Kingdom)
- EAU (Germany)
- Euro codes
- ROM (Spain)
- OCDI (Japan)

89
- PIANC (for specific aspects)

4.3.1. Design Considerations

Terminal specific loads that should be considered for quay structure design include:
- Mooring and berthing loads from the vessels anticipated to call at the terminal
- Container loads: containers stacked two-high generally have a uniformly distributed load of 25 to 40
kN/m2
- Wheel loads from trailers, forklift trucks (forklift trucks for handling 40 ft containers can have axle loads
of up to 1,200 kN)
- Mobile cranes (a typical concentrated design load of at least 700 kN on an outrigger pad area of 1 x
1 m)
- Container cranes on rails (loads can be taken from the specific equipment planned for the site): in
addition, the loads imposed while cranes are being landed from the transporter vessel and jacked up
to sit on the rails should be allowed for, either at specific locations or throughout the quay length.
Wheel loads for rail-mounted cranes should be increased by 10 % and for forklift trucks and cranes by
20 % due to dynamic impacts. Both the quay apron and the whole container yard have to be designed
in a homogeneous way and must be able to carry the heaviest combination of wheel or static loads for
all handling equipment that may be present in the areas.
Mooring: refers to the system for safely securing the ship to the quay structure. The mooring of the
ship must resist the forces due to the most severe combination of wind, current, tides, waves or swells,
fetches and surges from passing vessels.
The quay structure should be provided with bollards or quick release hooks such as to permit the largest
ship using the berth to be accommodated to remain safely moored alongside the quay structure, and
equipped with sufficient mooring points to provide a satisfactory spread of mooring for the range of ship
sizes which could use the berth.
Materials for mooring lines includes steel wire, manila rope, nylon rope, etc., i.e. different materials
implying wide variations in the breaking loads and ductility of the various mooring lines. Figure 4.1 below
shows a general mooring arrangement for a ship to a berth via bollards.

Figure 4.1: Typical mooring arrangement

90
A fundamental principle is that all forces from the ship normal to the quay front (e.g. due to wind from
land) should be taken by the breast lines, while the forces along the quay front (wind, current, etc.)
should be taken by the spring lines. The table below gives typical mooring parameters.

Vessel Approx. Spacing Bollard Load Bollard Load

Bollard Load
Displacement between Bollards Normal to Berth Along the Berth
(kN)
(t) (m) (kN per m) (kN per m)
2,000 100 5 - 10 15 10
5,000 200 10 - 15 15 10
10,000 300 15 20 15
20,000 500 20 25 20
30,000 600 20 30 20
50,000 800 20 - 25 35 20
100,000 1,000 25 40 25

Table 4.3: Typical mooring parameters (based on BS 6349-1)

For larger ships, specific calculations must be carried out to determine the maximum bollard load, taking
into account the type of ship and the environmental loading.
Fendering: PIANC WG 33 (‘Guidelines for the Design of Fender Systems’, 2002) should be used in
the calculation of the berthing energies and in the selection of the fender system.
Ice: in addition to the weight of accumulated ice on the structure, the forces exerted by floating ice
should be considered. Some useful assumptions are contained in EAU 2004.
Corrosion protection: marine steel structures can be protected by the following two main types of
cathodic protection systems:
- Sacrificial anode system, which consists of a sacrificial anode immersed in the seawater (the
electrolyte) and electrically connected to the marine steel structure (e.g. the quay structure). The
protected surface of the marine steel structure will now act as a cathode.
- Impressed current system, which requires large quantities of current when used to protect marine
steel structures. As the name indicates, a protective direct current is impressed to the cathode
surface by external means. A rectifier consisting of a step-down transformer and a rectifier stack
converts alternating current to direct current.
Refer to PIANC WG 44 – ‘Accelerated Low Water Corrosion’ and WG 17 – ‘Inspection, Maintenance
and Repair of Maritime Structures Exposed to Damage and Material Degradation Caused by Salt Water
Environment’ for extensive descriptions of the corrosion issues related to the design of structures in a
marine environment.
In addition to using a cathodic protection system, it is possible to paint the steel elements with anti-
corrosion compositions or protective coatings to form a barrier to the environmental exposure and
thereby delay the corrosion. Where protective coatings or cathodic protection are not practical or their
maintenance is doubtful, an increased section or extra thickness of steel equal to the amount of
corrosion expected for the lifetime of the quay structure may be economically justified and a technically
better solution.
Scour protection: generally, the slope and bed protection under and in front of a quay structure should
follow recommendations such as those in PIANC WG 22 (‘Guidelines for the Design of Armoured
Slopes under Open Piled Quay Walls’) and PIANC WG 48 (‘Guidelines for Port Construction Related
to Thrusters’).

91
The erosion of the sea bottom in front of a quay structure and of the filling under an open berth structure
will generally be due to wave action at the upper part of the filling and from currents from the main ship
propellers, the bow and stern thrusters, or from support tugs – see Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2: Effects of scour on structures

The introduction of ship bow and stern thrusters around 1960 was due to the need to increase the ship's
manoeuvrability thereby minimizing its manoeuvring time in the port. New and powerful ships with
modern propeller systems, frequently combined with aggressive manoeuvring, can cause severe
erosion in ports that otherwise would have remained stable for decades.
In designing the scour protection it may be economical to accept some damage during the lifetime and
anticipate/plan for the increased maintenance required to protect the structure.
The top elevation of berth structure: should be determined by the following factors:
- The elevation of the terminal area behind the berth apron
- The highest observed water level and the tidal level
- The maximum surge in the harbour basin due to wind or atmospheric pressure
- The wave action in the harbour basin
- Projected sea level rise
- The type of ship using the berth
- The harbour installations and the cargo operation
At an existing port it may be appropriate to adopt the same top elevation as the nearby berth structures.
For a berth structure directly connected to the open sea, the top elevation of the berth slab should be
at least 1 m above the highest observed crest of the wave in the port. Generally for a berth structure
within an impounded harbour the top elevation of the berth slab and apron should at least be 1.5 m
above the highest observed water level.

92
4.3.2. Quay Furniture
The following equipment is located to the front of, or on top of, the quay structure cope:
Fenders: Fenders typically comprise elastomeric rubber units fitted with low friction ultra-high molecular
weight (UHMW) polyethylene front panels and galvanised steel restraining chains.
Bollards: should be sized based on mooring evaluation and spaced to provide berthing flexibility.
Safety ladders: are generally spaced at 15-18 m centres (to suit fender modules) and extend from
concrete cope level down to 1 m below low water spring tide level or 0.5 m below LAT. The ladders can
be recessed into the concrete cope to prevent damage and recessed hand holds should be provided
on top of the cope for ease of egress.

4.4. Quay Apron

The quay apron on a container berth can be described as the area between the berth face and the
container yard. Figure 4.3 below shows a typical example of the quay cope area.

Figure 4.3: Typical quay cope area

93
The following items are considered as part of the apron:

4.4.1. Cope
It is recommended that the minimum distance from the centre line of the front crane rail to the front face
of the fender system be no less than 6 m and the minimum distance from the cope edge to the centre
line of the front crane rail is 4 m. This will provide a safe space for mooring gangs and other maintenance
and operational personnel on the water side of the STS cranes.
It will also enable the crane cable slot, crane pits and storm tie down pits to be located on the water
side of the front crane rail where they will be less prone to damage and also to accommodate container
ships’ crew gangways.

4.4.2. Rear Crane Rail Beam

The rear crane rail beam can be designed integrally with the main berth structure but it is commonly
designed as an independent structure. The primary design consideration for the rear crane rail beam is
the vertical live loading from the rear legs of the quay crane. Traditionally, quay cranes had a rail gauge
of 100 ft (30.48 m) but this can be up to 45 m for the largest STS quay cranes.

4.4.3. STS Crane Rails

Crane rails are welded to form a continuous length and are supported on a steel base plate complete
with adjustable bolts to facilitate fine adjustments for levelling to within the required tolerances.
A proprietary resilient steel reinforced bearing pad is placed between the bottom of the rail and the base
plate. The base plate is grouted into position using a high strength, pourable, non-shrink epoxy grout,
extending to a level coincident with the top level of the base plate.
Galvanised rail clips with rubber facings should be used to restrain the rails to prevent surge (‘bow
wave’) along the length of the rails and to resist transverse and overturning forces induced by the ship
to shore cranes. The clips should be adjustable to facilitate fine adjustments for aligning the rail to within
the required tolerances. The rail clips also allow free longitudinal expansion and contraction of the rail
due to temperature variations and damaged rails to be removed and replaced with ease. The clips
should be self-locking and self-tightening.
The top of the crane rails should be level with the surrounding surface.
Earthing connections must be welded by fasteners to the crane rails and the connections must extend
3 m below lowest astronomical tide and be at not more than 100 m centres.

94
4.4.4. Crane Cable Slot
The crane cable slot is usually located on the water side of the front crane rail and not between the
crane legs to minimise damage from operational traffic. The distance of the centre line of the slot from
the centre line of the crane rail is determined by the location of the cable reel on the STS cranes and is
generally a distance of approximately 1 m.
Although it is possible to construct a cast in-situ cable slot within the concrete cope it is more common
to use a preformed galvanised insert capable of accommodating up to six crane cables one on top of
the other simultaneously. The bottom of the slot should be 95 mm wide for 90 mm diameter high voltage
cables (cable size depends on crane voltage and shielding requirements). Drainage holes should be
provided through the concrete cope (e.g. 6 m centres).
The slot is often fitted with a continuous rubber hinged ‘Panzerbelt’, which covers the opening and
provides protection from operational vehicles and keeps debris from entering the cable slot. The cover
is jointed using vulcanised halving joints and fixed down by galvanised steel strips in a 400 mm wide
recess.

4.4.5. Crane Cable Connection Pits

Crane cable pits should be provided in the central portion of the quay at locations that result in optimal
coverage by the STS cranes while also avoiding the need for excessive cable lengths. The number of
crane pits required will be determined by the length of quay and final number STS cranes to be serviced.
The pits should be located under the cable slots and sized to accommodate equipment for up to four
STS cranes (e.g. 2.8 m wide x 2.4 m deep), with the length designed as a function of the cable drum
outlets). The reinforced concrete cope is often required to be deeper under the pits.
A cable drum and anchor system needs to be provided within each pit to allow smooth movement of
the cables during changes in direction, to prevent the HV cables being pulled out of the pit and to
prevent tension being applied to the HV plug and socket. Each pit needs to be fitted with a heavy duty
cover, access ladder and drainage system.
The pits need to be fitted with a plug and socket assembly and mounted on a two panel mating skid
frame fitted with a key interlock to suit the chosen HV switchgear. Table 4.4 summarises the cable
connection pit parameters.

Parameter Recommendation

Position Beneath cable slot, seaward side of front crane

rail

Number of crane connections per pit Generally 2 or 4 crane connections per pit

Minimum pit dimensions To suit man access

To suit cable installation
To suit equipment installation

Equipment Cable tulip/funnel

Cable pit cover
Cable anchor drum
Cable termination plugs and sockets

Drainage Sump to be provided

Pump to be provided

95
 Parameter Recommendation

High and low level alarms

Electrical supply LV supply for tools

Supply for drainage pumps
LV supply for luminaires

Bell mouths Bell mouths for ducts into pits

Covers Heavy duty covers

15 kN/m2: 5 kN wheel load

Depth of services Clear cover 1.2 m minimum below ground level

Table 4.4: Crane cable connection pit parameters

4.4.6. Crane Buffers

Crane buffers should be fitted to steel structures and installed on the apron at the ends of the crane
rails to prevent STS cranes being blown or driven off the end of the rails. The centreline of the buffer
itself should be set at a height of between 1 m and 2 m depending on the height of the STS crane buffer.
Typically, each buffer structure should be capable of resisting a horizontal load of 1,000 kN.

4.4.7. Crane Storm Tie Downs and Anchor Slots

At all terminals slots should be installed to receive storm anchor pins that are lowered from the crane
to prevent it from being blown along the rails while the crane is parked. The slots should be positioned
adjacent to both crane rails at intervals along the quay and the number of parking locations should be
no fewer than the final number of cranes.
At locations where strong winds could lift cranes off the rail, storm tie down points should be provided
throughout the quay length located in recesses in the concrete either side of the front and rear crane
rails. The tie downs should be positioned adjacent to both crane rails in locations commensurate with
the storm anchor pin slots. The holding eyes should be constructed of galvanised mild steel and all
cast-in items should be made of stainless steel.

4.4.8. Utilities
The following items may be included on the apron depending on forecast need and local regulations:
- Water supply: fresh water, potable water, bunkering, fire-fighting system
- Storm water drainage
- Waste reception and disposal
- Electrical power requirements for STS cranes and cold ironing
- Lighting
- Telecommunication networks: communications, crane data systems
- Fuel bunkering
- Security and safety

96
4.5. Yard Area
A container yard area must not only allow for efficient container handling and storage but also
accommodate functional characteristics associated with the passage of vehicles and for vehicle
manoeuvring in line with the terminal concept and vehicle requirements. Thus, the size of the yard must
be calculated within the terminal planning phase (see Section 2).
In general, the configuration for container yard should cater for all terminal specific operations, including
vehicle and equipment utilisation taking account of the peak throughput capacity of the facility.
Therefore, the pavement design of a specific terminal is directly related to the detailed operational
concept and may vary throughout the yard facility. Furthermore, depending on local conditions at the
terminal, adequate storm water drainage must be provided (see Section 4.7.2).

4.5.1. Yard Pavement

Container yard pavements, unlike highway pavements, are subjected to high loading due to container
stacking as well as wheel high loads from heavy container handling equipment. The design of the
pavement for a container terminal is primarily dependent on the design loads and the design life, as
well as the number of passes during its life. The design loads are dependent on the use of each
designated area (e.g. the pavement meant to support stevedoring operations will not be required to
support the same loads as the pavement for truck traffic).
Pavement design considerations include subsoil conditions, allowable settlements, operational
constraints, local material availability and national rules and regulations. Some national regulations pre-
determine only special types of pavement. The following types of pavement are common:
- Concrete block pavement
- Asphalt pavement
- Concrete slab pavement, either cast in-situ or precast slabs
- Roller compacted concrete pavements
Depending on the operational system of the terminal and the drainage properties of the ground, gravel
beds, with or without ground beams, can also be considered for the container stack areas.
Many terminals are designed with concrete ground beams or pads to support the container corners, so
that the areas between them can be surfaced with a light duty pavement or gravel (depending on the
drainage properties of the ground). This arrangement can have the further advantage that the
containers are level so the stacks are vertical, as compared with inclined stacks that result when the
pavement has to incorporate a drainage slope.
RTG runways may be designed as pavement but more commonly take the form of separate concrete
beams. RMG rails may be supported on a concrete beam or sleepers, the latter may require the track
to be lifted and/or realigned periodically to restore line and level.
The use of 16 wheeled RTGs can obviate the need for reinforced concrete beams.
The design life will be dependent on the design loads as well as the maintenance frequency of the
pavement. Design of all heavy duty pavements including concrete block should consider the rules and
recommendations of ‘Interpave – The Structural Design of Heavy Duty Pavements for Ports and Other
Industries’, Edition 4, December 2007. Relevant information can be found on www.paving.org.uk.
Pavement design philosophy — over its life a pavement will support a number of load repetitions of a
given severity. Each load will damage, or in effect, wear the pavement. The relationship of load versus
frequency is not linear, with a single heavy load causing more wear than several, or even many, loads
at half the weight. In summary, every pavement fails but the goal is to ensure maximum service life for
the least overall cost.
As the pavement wears, it cracks, pumps, shifts, ruts, delaminates and otherwise deforms from the
original flat, smooth condition which existed when it was constructed. Over the life of the pavement,
maintenance measures may be incorporated to correct or reduce the advance of damage. The point at

97
which a pavement is worn or damaged beyond the economic effort to maintain it, thus requiring
replacement, is the practical end of its service life. This point is a function of both the level of corrective
maintenance applied over the life of the pavement and the acceptable level of damage over which
facility vehicles can be operated.
The serviceability level of the pavement is defined by the operator and is impacted by the level of
maintenance that will be performed over the life of the pavement. Assuming the number and severity
of load cycles can be calculated, the pavement design can be defined from the outset.
From the above approach some conclusions can be summarised as follows:
1. Temporary or short-term pavements can be employed which have a lower cost of installation, but
they will require heavy maintenance or frequent replacement. The ultimate choice of a short-term
versus long-term solution must not only include allowances for changes in area use, but also an
estimate of the total cost of the pavement over the total life of the facility.
2. Though gate facilities which only handle highway traffic experience lighter loads over their life, the
number of load cycles in these areas will be significantly higher as all highway traffic must pass
through them. Likewise, aisles and frequently travelled routes will generally require a more durable
pavement than parking areas.
3. The use of rigid pavements under stacked containers is cautioned as the concentrated loads can
result in fracture of the pavement rather than just deformation. Flexible pavements with indentations
caused by container corner castings can be repaired without replacement.
Most pavement design models incorporate four key components: soil condition, environment, design
loads and pavement life/serviceability. Of these, the first two are site dependent with in-situ mitigation
measures the only means to change these parameters. Typical container stacks and corner casting
loads can be found in ‘Interpave – Design Manual 2007’.
Loading/lifting equipment generally takes one of four forms: side-loading, reach-stackers, gantry crane
or straddle carrier, although there are many other types of equipment. Side-loading and reach stacking
equipment, though extremely flexible, have a highly concentrated load through the front axle. The
mobility of these machines generally requires significantly increased pavement depth over a large area
(effectively all areas where the equipment can be operated). Furthermore, the tight turning radii relative
to the machine’s size causes significant lateral surface loads, which can lead to rutting and plastic flow
of paving materials. Rubber Tyred Gantry (RTG) cranes and straddle carriers (SCs) generally have a
more evenly distributed wheel loading and their mobility throughout the facility is generally concentrated
along defined runways adjacent to the tracks or over blocks of stacked containers. However, the overall
vehicle weight coupled with the concentration of loading cycles generally results in the paved runways
being at least as substantial as pavement designed for side-loading equipment. Typical loading
equipment types are as follows:
- forklift truck
- rubber tyred gantry crane
- rail mounted gantry crane
- loaded container handlers
- empty container handlers
- reach-stackers
- side-loaders
- straddle carriers
- shuttle carriers
The standard loads for these different types of equipment varies greatly and also depends on whether
or not they are handling full or empty containers. The manufacturers of this equipment have typical
datasheets which show the physical characteristics of the equipment, e.g. wheel base and typical axle
and wheel loads. These datasheets should be used for design purposes.
For container storage on trailers the pavement load considerations for trailer storage should address
the following questions:
98
- Is the pavement designed for the parking of full semi-trailers?
- Will the aisles between the parking rows be accessed only by truck traffic, or will lift equipment also
be operating in the area for ‘turning’ of containers?
Empty chassis are generally stored either as parked trailers or in special racks. Where racks are not
employed, light duty pavements are frequently used.
Pavement design should as far as possible provide an operationally flexible pavement, so that if
business parameters change the operations can be altered accordingly. It is also important to consider
different uses and associated pavement designs in order to reduce pavement costs. Concrete, including
block paving is frequently designed with a 25-year design life. This means that local damage and repairs
should be expected within that period but wholesale replacement should not be necessary until this
period has elapsed.
Pavement design can be undertaken using specialised computer programmes such as FE-Plaxis,
however pavement design is generally carried out using standard guidance and calculations, e.g. the
‘Interpave Design Manual’. The selection of the type of top running layer should be based on its
resistance to loads, ease of access to underground surfaces, drainage, flexibility of operations,
construction method and availability and the ease of repair. A typical pavement is shown in Figure 4.5
below.

Figure 4.5: Example of heavy duty block pavement section

(Legend: CBP: Concrete Block Pavement; CBR: California Bearing Ratio;
CBM: Cement Bound Material)

Within various ports all over the world there is a wide range of examples for pavement design as the
factors described above vary significantly. The following pictures in Figures 4.6 and 4.7 present some
examples of pavement, including an example of a poor block pavement in which settlement has resulted
in an uneven surface.

99
 Figure 4.6: Examples of (1) good and (2) poor heavy duty block pavement
Other types of pavement especially in areas of high rainfall include gravel bed type pavements, as
shown below. These are primarily used in the container stacking areas.

Figure 4.7: Gravel bed type pavement and RTG runway area

4.5.2. Rail Yard

In order to carry containers matching ISO standards, railways must meet certain minimum physical
standards. The main design factors are track gauge, axle load, service frequency, number of trains,
loading structure, gauge, length and mass of unit trains. Furthermore, a criterion that establishes the
successful design of a rail yard includes the following parameters: lift area, working tracks, container
and rail car storage area. Consideration should be given to local vehicular/equipment crossings of rail
tracks. The number of locomotives required for the longest/ heaviest trains has also to be considered
with regard to the track layout.
Restrictions on use are imposed by track quality, rail profile and bridge loading capacities. A permitted
axle load of 13 tonnes in combination with the use of four-axle wagons is a minimum requirement for
container transport.
Containers can be transported on multi-purpose flat cars or low-sided wagons or purpose built container
wagons. The choice is influenced by the need to reduce tyre weight while increasing pay-load per
wagon and train. The tyre weight and carrying capacity of some special container wagons are as shown
in Table 4.5. The rolling stock used on a terminal is often determined by the local railway stock available
to serve the terminal.

100
 Figure 4.8: Typical four-axle wagon

Average Container Gross Mass Gross Mass Axle Load Axle Load
Weight (3 containers) (2 containers) (3 containers) (2 containers)
16 t 67.5 t 51.5 t 16.875 t 12.875 t
20 t 79.5 t 59.5 t 19.875 t 14.875 t
28 t 103.5 t 75.5 t 25.875 t 18.875 t
34 t 121.5 t 87.5 t 30.375 t 21.875 t

Table 4.5: Axle loads for container transport (1 high)

(Source: Australian Rail Track Corporation Ltd (ARTC): Train Operating Conditions Manual (2009))

The intermodal rail yard includes the rail loading tracks and the adjacent space where the physical
transfer is performed. Transfers are typically undertaken by rubber tyred or rail-mounted gantry
overhead cranes or by side loaders/reach stackers or straddle carriers.
The working tracks or strip tracks should accommodate the longest design train likely to operate on the
adjacent railway. Based on the design of rail wagons, throughput per annum and hauling capacity of
the locomotives on the route, the total train length in terms of containers can be determined. The length
of the working tracks is a function of the number of trains handled daily, dwell time and the number of
cranes assigned to the stripping operation. Also, whether crane ways or side loaders are used
determines dwell time of the trains.

4.6. Buildings and Ancillary Facilities

4.6.1. General
The following subsections give examples of buildings and ancillary facilities in a typical terminal.

4.6.2. Gate Facilities

The gate is one of the core operational elements unless the terminal is dedicated to transhipment.
Container terminals are part of a logistics chain and most traffic (except transhipment and on terminal
rail) will pass through the gate. Overall terminal gate facilities are generally divided into IN-gate
(receiving) and OUT-gate (delivery). A typical gate facility is shown in Figure 4.9.

101
 Figure 4.9: Typical gate complex

The design of the gates must consider required traffic clearance and it is also recommended to include
Out-of-Gauge (OOG) traffic lanes.
The number of required lanes should be calculated in the early design stages in accordance with the
overall terminal concept. Lane calculations include parameters such as: anticipated throughput,
percentage of dual transactions (dropping off and picking up), processing times and hours of operation.
In addition, the design of the gate needs to consider regulatory requirements such as traffic weighing
systems, security screening or x-ray scanners, which are sometimes mandatory.

4.6.3. Fuelling Facilities

Terminals are usually operated by diesel vehicles and dedicated fuelling facilities are generally located
within the terminal. However, in some terminals, the use of fuelling vehicles (bowsers) might be a more
economical option. In such instances, the terminal should provide dedicated areas for fuelling in order
to avoid environmental contamination.

4.6.4. Quayside Offices and Facilities

If there are large distances between the quay and the terminal administration building, quayside amenity
buildings with office and toilet facilities are recommended. The facility can also accommodate transport
vehicle parking or, as shown in Figure 4.10, a terminal bus stop. Thus, such a facility provides a safe
waiting area for operational personnel.

Figure 4.10: Typical quayside office

102
4.6.5. Equipment Washing Area
For cleaning of the mobile equipment the terminal must provide dedicated areas and Figure 4.11 shows
an example of an RTG wash area with an auxiliary building. As the area can also be used for washing
empty containers and other types of equipment it must be equipped with water supply, high pressure
cleaning systems, electrical sockets (i.e. for reefer containers), oil separation systems and drainage.

Figure 4.11: Typical equipment washing area

It is recommended that this area is kept separate from active terminal operational areas.

4.6.6. Tool Storage and Fire Truck

Within the terminal, tool storage facilities are usually required, unless stored in the main workshop
building. The following Figure 4.12 shows a typical lightweight storage structure combined with a fire
truck shelter. It is important to note that local regulations for fire fighting have to be strictly followed and
must be adhered to when designing a terminal.

Figure 4.12: Typical fire truck shelter and tool storage

4.6.7. Terminal Power Supply Sub-Station

Depending on the local conditions and the chosen medium voltage level of the terminal, a power supply
sub-station will generally be required. This sub-station transfers the public power supply delivered to
the terminal into the required levels, although if the terminal is in a remote location a separate power
103
generation plant may be required. Alternatively, if no power supply is available it is also possible to run
both ship to shore and yard cranes through use of on-board diesel generators. The main power demand
is typically from the STS cranes and reefers which require separate loops/rings and substation
transformers from the main incoming sub-station.
A typical large substation building is shown in Figure 4.13 below.

Figure 4.13: Typical large sub-station building

4.6.8. Terminal Workshop

Depending on the actual size of a terminal a workshop building is generally required within the terminal
area. The workshop is usually situated outside of the container storage and major handling areas but
should have good accessibility to all terminal areas. A workshop is essential for the maintenance of
terminal facilities (e.g. servicing of container handling equipment and vehicles) but can also
accommodate stores, spare parts and facilities for maintenance management and personnel. Details
and requirements of a typical workshop are described in Section 5.3.

4.7. Utilities

4.7.1. Water Supply

For the design of the water supply system a distinction is made between domestic use, the potable
water supply to vessels and use of water for fire-fighting. The type of water available includes both fresh
water and salt water. Fresh water is used primarily for drinking and washing and can also be used for
industrial applications such as vehicle wash down and cooling of plant equipment. A salt water
distribution piping system can be installed to serve the fire-fighting needs, as an alternative to fresh
water if this is acceptable to the operator and the authorities.
The fresh water distribution system is generally supplied from the local mains supply to either a
dedicated storage facility or a distribution network. If required above ground storage tanks must be
constructed in suitable materials for the storage of fresh water. If the pressure is low pumps can be
used to supplement the head of stored water.
The following key features generally apply:
- Storage facilities with level alarm
- Underground pipework suitable for potable water
- Potable water hydrant connections

104
Potable water bunkering can be provided if the berthed vessels are to be provisioned with potable water
at the quayside. The design should incorporate underground pipework from the potable water
distribution main to service pits; located at the quay edge, seaside of the waterside crane rail. The
service pits house hydrant points for the connection of hoses to the berthed vessels. The pits typically
incorporate water meters for the measurement of water supplied to vessels in order that vessels can
be charged for the usage of water. Potable watering bunkering points should be located at no more
than 200 m centres along the length of the quay. Backflow prevention devices are normally incorporated
into the connection points to prevent contamination of the mains supply.
For the fire-fighting system fire water hydrants can be fed from either the potable water main or from a
separate salt water main. The hydrants should be located in service pits of sufficient size to allow for
ease of access and maintenance otherwise pillars can mounted at surface level, with sufficient side
protection (except at the quay). If a salt water system is used this is fed from a salt water pumping
house(s) with a separate mains distribution system. Fire hydrants should be located at no more than
100 m centres along the length of the quayside, although local regulations often govern this spacing.
The following key features are normally included in a fire-fighting system:
- Salt water pump house(s) supplying the required pressure with sufficient reliability
- Jockey pumps for maintaining pressure in the pipeline using potable water
- Underground pipeline for fire mains distribution
- Hydrants and hose reel cabinets located at regular intervals
- Shore to ship flexible hose connections for vessel fire-fighting equipment
- Mobile fire-fighting equipment for shore, jetty and on board the vessel locations
- Fire alarm and detection systems
- Sub-station to provide power to the pumping station

4.7.2. Storm Water Drainage

The storm water drainage system should be designed with the following considerations in mind:
- To protect people, cargo and property from storm water inundation and to guarantee the
continuation of port operations
- To limit environmental impact by including oil and waste interceptors where appropriate
- To maximise gravity conveyance (minimal pumping) to achieve storm water removal goals
- To provide flexibility for tie-ins of future expansion areas (if necessary) and allow for intercepting
run-off from adjacent areas
It is likely a large proportion of surface water will be discharged into the sea unless a retention pond is
included in the storm water system design. This will usually require the provision of outfalls through the
quay structure. This effluent to the marine environment can result in significant loading of pollutants
including fine sediment, contaminants (e.g. hydrocarbons) and nutrient loading (e.g. phosphates,
nitrates and heavy metals). Adequate controls are recommended and the following steps should be
considered:
- The storm water drainage system should have features associated with minimising the risks of
pollution to sea, for example, isolation valves within the outfall pipes to enable shut-down in the
case of maintenance, emergency spills or back-up of sea water during periods of abnormally high
tide levels, screens, sumps, etc.
- Analysis of stored flushing water should be made and, if within accepted industrial discharge
standards, it can be discharged to the marine environment
- Incorporation of oil collectors/separators or other water quality measures; within the water
management system particularly for wash down facilities for vehicles and operational handling
equipment

105
4.7.3. Sewage Treatment and Disposal
In general, terminals do not separately treat wastewater or sewage but rather link into the local domestic
sewage treatment network. However, if this is not possible they can have their own dedicated (package)
treatment plant.
There are generally three types of waste that need to be dealt with in a terminal, as summarised below:
- Oily waste separators should be provided for surface water run-off at wash down and maintenance
facilities and grease traps should be provided in buildings’ sanitary waste discharge lines where
required to prevent effluent contamination. Collected oily waste should be disposed of at treatment
facilities off-site. Holding tanks for temporary storage of liquid oily waste prior to off-site disposal
may be provided.
- MARPOL waste in accordance with the MARPOL Convention (International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973 and modified by the Protocol of 1978) is the international
convention covering the prevention of pollution of the marine environment by ships from operational
or accidental causes.
- EU Directive 2000/59/EC on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues,
2000.
The objective of both regulations is to prevent the pollution of the marine environment by sea-going
vessels and to require the delivery of waste from these vessels at specific facilities in harbours. While
the MARPOL Convention, with its 6 Annexes, focuses on discharges by ships at sea, the EU Directive
focuses on ship operations in EU ports and addresses in detail the legal, financial and practical
responsibilities of the different operators involved in delivery of waste and cargo residues in ports.
Although the EU Directive is only applicable in the EU it also provides a sound basis for international
practice.
The EU Directive stipulates the following responsibilities of the different operators involved:
- Ports must ensure that port collection facilities are provided which meet the needs of the ships using
them without causing abnormal delays
- Each port must draw up a waste reception plan
- Captains of ships calling at a port are required to provide certain information, in particular the date
of the last port in which ship-generated waste was delivered and the quantity of waste remaining
on board
- All ships are required to deliver their ship-generated waste before leaving port, unless the Captain
can prove that his vessel has adequate storage capacity
- Ports must establish cost recovery systems to encourage the delivery of waste at the waste
reception facilities
The following types of waste are included:
- General waste including food waste
- Waste from cargo holds such as broken pallets, lashings, ropes and covers
- Harmless cargo residues
- Medical wastes
- Waste and oil from machinery spaces that is not covered by any other annex of the Convention
The disposal of such waste is normally collected at the quayside in trucks by commercial waste
companies.
The biological content of ballast water in particular poses a significant threat to the environment on a
global scale. This is partly due to the potential release of contaminated or polluted water taken in at one
location and discharged at another, but the main cause for concern is the trans-boundary movement of
species. There are several treatments available to reduce the risk of introducing potentially harmful
organisms via ballast water, such as water exchange i.e. water exchange occurs in

106
deep open water where the original port water is replaced by oceanic water, heat treatment and UV
treatment. As an alternative or additional measure, quayside collection and on-terminal treatment of
ballast water can be provided.

4.7.4. Electricity Supply

Normal power – normal commercial power in the terminal will be supplied from the local grid supplier.
Emergency power – emergency standby diesel generators or a centralised site emergency power
supply and distribution system are sometimes provided as backup where supply is unreliable. The
backup capacity will be based on nominal life safety requirements as well as power needed to sustain
critical operations. However, it is generally not considered practical to supply backup power to more
than one STS crane. Where the local power supply is very unreliable, or non-existent, cranes can be
provided with on-board individual diesel power generation.
Other power – in most terminals the STS cranes account for the largest proportion of power demand,
followed by reefers. The cranes when operating will produce regenerative power under certain
operational movements and produce electrical energy that can be allowed to be absorbed back into the
electrical distribution network thereby reducing the overall power requirement.

4.7.5. Electrical Power Requirements

Cranes – STS cranes, electrically operated RTGs and RMGs generally each require voltages of 5 to
15 kV to achieve acceptable hoisting speeds. Smaller cranes have less vertical distance to hoist and
can therefore move slower and achieve a comparable handling time.
In container terminals with a smaller operation, and where mains electricity is not available, STS cranes
may be diesel powered. This form of powering the STS cranes could be used as a temporary measure
to get the terminal operational as the electrical infrastructure is developed.
Mobile harbour cranes – are generally diesel powered but may also be connected to a shore power
supply.
Quayside – low voltage power may be required at the quayside for terminal maintenance operatives to
use equipment such as welders and grinders for small maintenance purposes. The requirements of this
power must be discussed with the terminal operator.
Reefer power – Figure 4.14 illustrates the power connections required for reefers.

Figure 4.14: Typical reefer power connection arrangement

107
Power supply for the reefer electrical equipment is usually 3 Phase 440 V and is provided using ducted
wiring systems. Depending on the location of the terminal, agreements on power backup systems must
be made. Each stack should be provided with lighting for safe access, together with working and
convenient socket outlets.
Cold ironing – The aim of cold ironing, also known as alternative marine power (AMP), is to provide
shore side power to moored vessels at the quayside thereby reducing the fume stack exhaust (and
noise) generated by the on-board auxiliary generators that provide electrical power for the vessels’
domestic services and on-board reefer demand.
The main challenges in providing cold ironing are as follows:
Location of the plug-in point – vessels capable of accepting shore side power have their plug points in
different positions and therefore the power lead has to be of sufficient length to be available at different
locations along the quay.
Frequency requirements – vessels are designed with an electrical system which operates at 50 Hz. The
UK and most of Europe and other countries in the World have electrical systems which operate at 60
Hz, which means that berths in these countries need to provide a frequency converter. These generally
cost up to US$ 1.5 million; although some suppliers now provide converters mounted on road trailers
so that they can be moved into position opposite the plug-in point once the vessel has berthed.
However, the problem with trailer-mounted converters is that the trailer can obstruct berth operations
whereas if the terminal decides to put the converter into a building then positioning of the building
becomes important. This is of particular interest for multiple berths in line; each berth may require a
separate converter. It is worth pointing out that in the US the mains supply operates at 60 Hz, which
matches that of the vessels so the cost to provide shore side power is significantly lower.
Power requirements at the berth and incoming to the terminal – generally large container vessels have
a power requirement of up to 11 kV, whereas smaller vessels generally require 3 kV. Considering a
container terminal with four berths, each berth will require a separate 11 kV supply, which results in
several issues:
- Does the terminal have this capacity? In order to find out the current working load in the port or
terminal a full network modelling exercise must take place.
- The utility may not have capacity in the area, therefore a new distribution will have to be organised,
which will be costly and take some time to procure and deliver.
Some ports have decided to operate a generator system to supply the vessel rather than providing the
infrastructure modifications. This approach provides little or no environmental benefits over the vessel
running its auxiliary generators whilst moored at the berth.
Conclusion
The cost to provide shore side power is high and it needs to be considered whether it is better supplied
from the external provider or generated at the port.
If the power comes from the local supplier the costs are generally greater as they must cover the long
cable which could be potentially kilometres from the terminal, along with construction of new sub-
stations and a main incomer sub-station building.

4.7.6. Lighting

108
 Figure 4.15: Typical high mast light

Apron – general operational quayside lighting is normally provided from terminal high mast lights to an
average level of 20 lux in working areas and minimum of 5 lux at any means of access. At the quayside
during operational periods additional lighting is provided from the STS cranes.
Yard area – container terminal lighting is generally provided by a grid of high mast lights strategically
located within the container stacks to optimise illumination levels and also minimise any impact upon
operations and storage facilities as well as any nearby urban areas. The lighting level depends on local
codes, labour agreements and operational needs. Lighting may also be available from yard gantry
cranes and 5 lux is considered a reasonable minimum level.

4.7.7. Communications Networks

The local telecommunications provider will generally provide exchanges, telecom cabinets and telecom
rooms, as required, in each building. This would include all associated cabling and equipment. From
the telecom rooms, all downstream cabling to the workstations are generally provided by the terminal.
The data and telephone communications distribution infrastructure is usually incorporated to
accommodate the telephone, data, alarm and crane monitoring and management distribution systems
required for the terminal operation.
Telecommunication pits – telecommunication pits and plug-in sockets for use by vessels should be
provided within the concrete cope and fed from ducts connected to the main terminal data and
communication network. The pits should be fitted with removal covers.
Data – fibre optic cables generally make up the data system networks including CCTV security, fire
alarm systems and handling systems. For a container terminal, a crane monitoring and maintenance
system to the administration building and/ or workshop is usually provided. A range of cargo
management systems are available, with antenna poles and spare duct capacity recommended for their
installation. Antenna poles would be multi-purpose and could also be used for mounting CCTV cameras.

4.7.8. Fuel Bunkering

Fuel bunkering at the quayside can either be provided by barge or via a quayside piping system
supported by pipelines from a tank farm or by tanker trucks. The barge option requires a loading point
nearby so the barge can load fuel. A dedicated quayside fuel bunkering option has a high capital costs
as well as space requirements due to the need to have an extensive piping system supported by a fuel
storage tank farm. The fuel barge option requires that the barge is berthed alongside the vessel while
the fuel is transferred.

109
4.8. Security and Safety Issues

4.8.1. Security
A new comprehensive security regime came into force in July 2004 with the intention of strengthening
maritime security to prevent and suppress acts of terrorism against shipping. Both the International Ship
and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code and the Container Security Initiative (CSI) have represented the
culmination of work by the International Maritime Organisation’s (IMO) Maritime Safety Committee and
the United States Custom and Border Protection Service in the aftermath of terrorist atrocities in the
United States in September 2001.
The ISPS Code takes the approach that the security of ships and port facilities is basically a risk
management activity and to determine what security measures are appropriate an assessment of risks
must be undertaken for each particular case.
Container movements are considered particularly sensitive in this respect and are therefore subject to
some specific regulations. In particular the CSI seeks to use non-intrusive inspection (NII) and radiation
detection technology before containers are shipped to the United States of America.
ISPS Code – was adopted by the IMO on July 1, 2004 as an amendment of the SOLAS (Safety of Life
At Sea) Convention. The objectives of the ISPS Code are:
- To establish an international framework involving contracting governments, government agencies,
local administrations and the shipping and port industries to detect security threats and take
preventive measures against security incidents affecting ships and port facilities used in
international trade
- To establish the respective roles and responsibilities of the contracting governments, government
agencies, local administrations and the shipping and port industries, at the national and international
level, for ensuring maritime security
- To ensure the early and efficient collection and exchange of security-related information
- To provide a methodology for security assessments so as to have in place plans and procedures to
react to changing security levels
- To ensure confidence that adequate and proportionate maritime security measures are in place
In order to achieve its objectives the ISPS Code embodies a number of functional requirements. These
include but are not limited to the following:
- Gathering and assessing information with respect to security threats and exchanging such
information with appropriate contracting governments
- Requiring the maintenance of communication protocols for ships and port facilities
- Preventing unauthorised access to ships, port facilities and their restricted areas
- Preventing the introduction of unauthorised weapons, incendiary devices or explosives to ships or
port facilities
- Providing means for raising the alarm in reaction to security threats or security incidents
- Requiring ship and port facility security plans based upon security assessments
- Requiring training drills and exercises to ensure familiarity with security plans and procedures
The first step in complying with the ISPS Code is that national governments conduct security
assessments of each port facility within their territory that serves ships engaged on international
voyages. Specifically for container terminals, the risk assessments should include such items as:

- Transhipment superstructure used at the terminal

- Workforce
- Access control of external persons at the site
- Barriers and fencing

110
- Lighting
- Rail-road-waterway infrastructure;
- Origin/destination of vessels calling at the terminal
- Storage area for dangerous goods
- ICT (Terminal Operating Systems)
The Port Facility Security Assessment will help to determine which port facilities are required to appoint
a Port Facility Security Officer and to prepare a Port Facility Security Plan. This plan should indicate the
operational and physical security measures the port facility should take at any security level (1, 2 or 3).
Container Security Initiative (CSI) – was launched by the US Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
in 2002. Its purpose was to increase security for container cargo shipped to the United States. The
initiative consists of 4 core elements:
- To establish security criteria for identifying high-risk containers based on advance information
- Pre-screening of containers at the earliest possible point
- To use technology to quickly pre-screen high-risk containers
- To develop secure container handling
Under CSI, high-risk containers receive security inspections, including X-ray and radiation scans, before
being loaded on board vessels destined for the USA. Once high-risk containers are inspected at CSI
ports, they are not ordinarily inspected again upon arrival at the US seaport. This means that the
containers inspected at CSI ports actually move faster, more predictably and efficiently through USA
seaports.

Figure 4.16: Container being scanned/X-rayed

Detection of nuclear and radiological materials, including dirty bombs, is a particular concern for security
agencies in their combat against terrorist threats. A radiation portal monitor is a device that provides a
passive, non-intrusive means to screen trucks and other conveyances for the presence of nuclear and
radiological materials. These systems are capable of detecting various types of radiation emanating
from nuclear devices, dirty bombs, special nuclear materials, natural sources and isotopes commonly
used in medicine and industry.
Portal radiation monitors do not emit any radiation and are therefore completely safe for anyone passing
by them. They are different from X-rays in that they do not produce images. Portal monitors are passive
systems that capture and are alert to energy emitted by radioactive sources that happen to pass near
them.
Many believe the CSI requires 100 % of containers destined from a CSI port to the USA to be scanned
using NII technology. This is not correct and there are no international standards, which define the

111
percentage of containers that must be scanned, and neither do the CSI Mega-Port initiatives, which is
the United States sponsored radiation screening programme setting scanning standards.
X-ray Portals – customs and border requirements are constantly evolving and priorities have moved
from monitoring cross-border cargo and contraband to screening for arms, dirty bombs and weapons
of mass destruction. X-ray machines for the screening of both cargo and personnel have been the front
line method of detection for a number of years.
They are available in various forms from hand held and mobile units to fixed high-volume installations.
However, for the purpose of container screening a drive-through X-ray Portal system is generally
adopted.
An X-ray Portal system uses X-ray technology to produce images of contents inside the container and
high-energy systems have the capability to image the entire contents of a fully loaded container and
compare it to the cargo manifest. There are several types of X-ray systems on the market including
high-energy transmission X-ray; gamma ray X-ray (clarity of image poor) and backscatter X-ray.
A standard X-ray Portal has a footprint approximately 7 m wide x 17 m long. In addition, there should
be a radiation safety exclusion zone of approximately 2 m around the Portal system.
The most advanced portal system currently in use claims an average inspection rate of 120 standard
ISO 40 ft containers per hour. However, it is important to note that the major time factor is not the length
of time taken to complete the physical scans but for the operators to evaluate the scan image.
Based on existing operations throughout the world the average rate of screening is 2 to 3 minutes,
which equates to 20 to 30 containers per hour.
The appropriate location for the X-ray Portal is at the export and import main terminal gate facility which
is an area within the gate complex where containers can be set down and their contents investigated
further.
At ISPS Security Level 1 (Normal) it is recommended that 10 % of all containers be scanned using NII
technology (X-ray or Radiation Detection) or physically searched. At Security Level 2 (Heightened) a
minimum of 50 % of all containers should be scanned or searched and at Security Level 3 the
Government may either close the port or require 100 % of all cargo entering the port to be scanned or
searched.
There is the possibility that 100 % screening will become the norm in a few years’ time so the layout of
the main entrance gate complex to the terminal may need to be designed with this in mind.
Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) – an effective CCTV surveillance system is vital for implementing the
access control and gate management systems.
A CCTV system ensures continuous monitoring of landside and waterside zone buildings, perimeter
fences, gates and entrances. The system must be integrated within the access control, perimeter
detection and gate management systems. The system should include the following features:
- View live cameras
- Continuous recording or scheduled recording
- Alarm or event initiated warning systems
- Camera pre-sets and pop-ups on alarm monitors for live view and recording
- A backup system to ensure continuous monitoring and recording during system faults, emergency
and crisis situations
Perimeter security – good perimeter security in the form of fencing or walls is a necessity for the integrity
of a container terminal to deny entry to persons, vehicles and trucks into the facility except through
designated controlled entry points. Perimeter fencing or walls should have minimum standards as
shown below:
- A 2.4 m high PVC coated chain link/weldmesh fence, topped with razor ribbon, Type III General
Purpose Barbed Tape Obstacle

112
- For buildings close to the perimeter, the fence or wall height should be increased by 50 %. Razor
ribbon should be used to the sides of the buildings to eliminate gaps at these locations
- Type III General Purpose Barbed Tape Obstacle, 450 mm in diameter, should be added to the top
of pedestrian and vehicle gates
- Alternatively, a galvanised steel palisade type fence with a reinforced concrete plinth wall and gates
may be considered
An electronic intruder detection system may also be provided. This system comprises a fence
disturbance detection system installed along the length of the entire fence and gates and is integrated
within the access control and gate management systems.
Security lighting – the primary purpose for any security lighting is to provide the means to detect and
deter intruders as well as light for CCTV cameras.
Lighting implies human observation and will be ineffective if personnel are not present to observe
illuminated areas. The system should ensure glaring light beyond the perimeter and into the eyes of
intruders and relatively little light along patrol routes or security posts. Darkness and periods of low
visibility allow a perpetrator of criminal acts the potential for a higher degree of success. Therefore,
modification of existing lighting may be required to impede, detect and prevent such acts.
It is important that:
- Lighting must be provided along the perimeter of the facility including the quayside. Lighting will be
such that it will not cause a glare that hinders vision of security personnel or drivers/operators or
water traffic.
- Light sources should be directed towards likely avenues of approach and/or the waterline to a
minimum of 30 m outwards from the perimeter of the onshore facility and the quayside.
- Lighting should provide overlapping illumination to prevent dark spaces.
- Security lighting must be activated during all hours of darkness.
- Security vehicles must be equipped with spot lighting.

4.8.2. Safety Issues

Specific health and safety issues related to terminal operations are subject to international agreements
and criteria. The main documents are the ILO convention 152 (1979) and the ILO code of practice2
(2003) which deal with health and safety of port labour. Although the ILO code of practice is not a legally
binding document, it is recommended that National regulations related to health and safety of port
operations should implement the provisions of these international agreements.
The ILO code of practice lists a number of recommendations related to safety of container terminal
operations. These are listed below.
Container terminals should be laid out and organised in such a way as to separate persons on foot from
vehicles, so far as is practicable.
Runways of RMG or RTG cranes should be clearly marked on the ground. It should not be possible to
confuse the markings with those of a safe walkway.
Segregation:
- Except at the quayside, the operational container-handling area should be enclosed by a fence or
wall at least 2.4 m high, or other suitable means, to separate it from other activities in the port and
prevent unauthorised entry.
- Arrangements should be made to ensure that persons who need to enter the operational areas are
able to do so safely. This may be achieved by the provision of clearly marked walkways, or by the
provision of transport to their destination.

113
- Traffic routes in container handling and container stacking areas should be laid out to be one-way,
as far as it is practical to do so. Traffic lights should be provided, where necessary.
- If walkways necessarily cross traffic routes, appropriate markings and signs should be provided on
the walkways and traffic routes to warn both pedestrians and drivers.
- The need for the vehicles of hauliers to enter container stacking areas should be avoided as far as
is practicable. This may be done by the provision of exchange grids where vehicles are loaded or
unloaded, for example by straddle carriers.
- Each container block and row should be clearly identified by markings on the ground or elsewhere.
The markings should be maintained so as to be clearly visible to vehicle and crane operators at all
times.
- Obstructions in container stacking and container handling areas should be kept to a minimum.

4.8.3. Reception Facilities

- Suitable facilities should be provided at the road entrances and exits to and from container handling
areas for checking of documents and the integrity of containers, including seals.
- Buildings should be designed so that the checker’s window is at a convenient height for the drivers
of container vehicles to permit the exchange of documents without the need for the driver to leave
the cab of the vehicle.
- The provision of suitable gantries at entrances and exits enables containers to be examined for
security purposes and to be checked for twist locks or other objects that have been left on the top
of a container and could later fall off. Mirrors and video cameras can also be used for these
purposes.
- Passengers in container vehicles should be prohibited from entering container handling areas. A
suitable room or area should be provided where passengers can await the return of the vehicle from
the container handling area.
- A suitable area should be designated and clearly identified where vehicle twist locks can be released
in safety.
- Suitable clearly signed and marked parking areas should be provided if vehicles are expected to
have to wait for significant times. If a parking area is situated at the side of a roadway, it should be
sited so as to ensure that parked vehicles will not obstruct or restrict vision from vehicles on the
adjacent roadway.
- Clearly marked walkways should be provided from parking areas to welfare facilities or other areas
or buildings which drivers may need to visit.

4.8.4. Control Rooms

- Control rooms for container handling areas should have a good overall view of the area.
- An efficient clear communication system should be provided between control and all terminal
vehicles. In order to minimise distractions to other drivers, the communication system should allow
control to communicate with specific vehicles, rather than all vehicles all the time.

4.8.5. Grids
- Suitable grids should be provided where straddle carriers or RMGs are used to load or unload
containers onto or from road vehicles.
- The grids should be clearly marked and laid out in parallel or echelon formation with centres not
less than 6 m apart.
- Where practicable, the traffic routes for road vehicles and container handling equipment should be
laid out for a one-way traffic flow.
- A safe area where drivers of road vehicles can stand while containers are being lifted onto or off
their vehicles should be provided and clearly marked.

114
5. MAINTENANCE
5.1. Maintenance Strategy
The overall maintenance policy for any port or terminal should be to maintain all of the facility assets to
the extent that the level of expenditure is justified, in order that the assets remain serviceable during
their design life or longer and for reasons of safety and security.
When the terminal is owner-operated the assets are maintained by the same organisation which owns
them and the expenditure for maintenance may be more easily justified. When a terminal operates
under a landlord-tenant arrangement, it can be more difficult for the tenant to financially justify
maintaining the landlord’s asset to full design life. For example, if a tenant has a 20 year lease on a
new terminal with the facility having a 50 year design life, it may not be in the tenant’s financial interest
to undertake maintenance to the level that will maintain the full design life of the facility. Therefore it is
important to assign maintenance responsibilities to cover the economic interests of both parties.
It therefore follows that to avoid unexpected large-scale rehabilitation measures and costly downtime
as a result of neglected maintenance, systematic planning and budgeting of maintenance activities is
essential.
To this end it is recommended that the principles of Life Cycle Management (LCM) be embraced for
new and existing port facilities from the outset. Three PIANC reports – ‘Inspection, Maintenance and
Repair of Maritime Structures Exposed to Damage and Material Degradation Caused by the Salt Water
Environment’, published in 1991 and revised in 2004, ‘Life Cycle Management of Port Structures’,
published in 1998 and ‘Life Cycle Management of Port Structures Recommended Practice for
Implementation’, published in 2007 – provide a useful background to formulating a maintenance
strategy.
LCM and its major component Whole Life Costing (WLC) will make a valuable contribution to the
maintenance policy for a terminal including decision making, planning, budgeting and funding of
inspection and repair activities during the lifetime of the port facilities.

5.2. Responsibility for Maintenance

Responsibility for the maintenance of equipment must be controlled by properly experienced personnel
under the control of a qualified Engineering Maintenance Manager and supervisory staff.
Effective maintenance management typically involves a team approach and the oversight role of the
Engineering Maintenance Manager. It also involves scheduling and prioritising of activities and
generating required reports to management and other stakeholders.
In addition to the manager, the maintenance management team typically involves engineering
inspection and supervisory staff. Often these are the same individuals. The inspectors collect the
required information in the field and produce subsequent reports while the supervisory staff prepares
plans and specifications for the repair and maintenance of facilities, plant and equipment.
Responsibility for the infrastructure should be under the control of a civil engineer and/or facilities
manager who will be responsible for the long term planned maintenance, replacement of items prone
to degradation through wear and tear and for responding to daily emergencies.
Minor and planned civil, building, mechanical and electrical maintenance can be more cost effectively
undertaken by in-house personnel who will be based in dedicated workshop facilities located within the
port facility.
Because of its specialist nature major maintenance should be carried out by suitably qualified
contractors or in respect of plant and equipment under service agreements with the manufacturers of
the equipment. This is particularly applicable to quayside gantry cranes, mobile harbour cranes,
specialised loading/unloading equipment, such as Rubber Tyre Gantry Cranes (RTGs) Straddle
Carriers (SCs) Rail Mounted Gantries (RMGs), reach stackers and empty container handlers (ECHs).

115
Work on other equipment such as tractor units, trailers, forklift trucks and other smaller pieces of
equipment can be carried out by qualified in-house tradesmen.

5.3. Maintenance Facilities

The maintenance facilities required will include a workshop with sufficient space to work on
approximately 10 % of the mobile equipment and spreaders at any one time. The maintenance facilities
should be located outside but close to the container yard.
A typical maintenance facility should generally cater for the following:
- A workshop section comprising a clear span shed with continuous doorways along one side and
equipped with an overhead travelling crane, under floor pits and services including water,
compressed air, lubricants and gases. for the maintenance and repair of all mobile cargo handling
equipment, as well as spreaders, tyres, batteries and other components.
- Separate electrician and electronic technician workshops within the main building.
- Offices for maintenance supervisory personnel.
- Stores with receipt point for external vehicles and issue of materials.
- Changing rooms/lockers/showers for all workshop personnel, first aid section and break facilities
may also be provided if the building is not close to the main canteen.
- A secure storage area for large items (e.g. tyres).
- A separate building or compound for tyre pressure testing.
- External wash bay(s) able to accommodate vehicles and mobile equipment.
- Container damage inspection, repair and wash down facility (optional).
- Mobile workshop(s) and small vans to be used for attending ship to shore crane breakdowns and
to minimise lost time resulting from minor breakdowns.
- In the area behind the quay apron, a small local store and workshop equipped with ready use spares
for attending quay crane breakdowns may be desired when the primary maintenance facility is
located a long distance from the quay area.
- Open service bays for RTGs fitted with anti-condensation heater connection points, electric plug-in
points for battery charging and wash-down areas.
- For straddle carriers, a high-bay building.
- Base for maintenance and repair of quay and yard rail-mounted gantry cranes.
- Separate workshop for spreader repairs (optional).
- Base for monitoring and repair of reefer power supplies.
- Fuel station (diesel, petrol, LNG, hydrogen, etc.) to serve all terminal mobile equipment, excluding
large machines that would be fuelled by bowser.
- Electric and battery charging stations for vehicles, including battery store.
- Welding bays with high voltage supplies.
- Major tools such as lifting jacks and small service fork lift.
- Cleaning systems (vacuum, washer systems, high pressure cleaner, etc.) for daily use by the staff.
- Parking for mobile equipment.
- Maintenance and repair of terminal infrastructure, buildings, etc.
Workshop personnel working around the terminal should be equipped with communication equipment.

116
 Figure 5.1: Typical workshop building

5.4. Spares
It will also be necessary to provide a Stores section within the maintenance facility that will hold
necessary spare components and materials. When determining what to hold in stock, consideration
should be given to the local availability of spares and weighed against the impact of having to wait for
spares which may have to be sourced and shipped from overseas and possibly subject to lengthy
internal procurement/approval procedures.
The list shown below although by no means exhaustive indicates suggested spares, which may be
appropriate to be held within the Stores section of the main workshop building:
- Electric motors
- Drives and controls
- Low voltage cabling
- High voltage cabling
- Transformer
- Sub-station switchgear
- Limit switches
- Flood lights
- Load cells
- CCTV cameras and cabling
- Control systems
- Security systems
- Anti-sway system
- Brakes (cranes, RMCGs, FLTs, reach stackers, empty container handlers, tractor units, trailers, port
vehicles)
- Sheaves
- Bearings
- Wire ropes
- Spreaders
- Fenders
- Bollards
- Pumps
- A small number of water main and sewerage pipes for emergency repairs
117
5.5. Management Information
The effectiveness of maintenance is normally measured by reference to budget expenditure and the
availability of plant and equipment or other aspects of the terminal infrastructure. For modern terminals
the latter aspect is most important and it will be necessary to obtain the operational times required for
equipment from the Operations Department in order to provide the engineering maintenance function
with workable and acceptable response times and levels of acceptable downtime available for
maintenance.
Setting up a system of inspection schedules through which planned preventative maintenance
expenditure and work executed can be budgeted and monitored on a monthly basis will assist in
minimising downtime due to equipment breakdowns.
Unscheduled repairs (breakdowns and accident damage) should be recorded for both the work carried
out and the associated costs.
There are a number of proprietary maintenance IT systems available for both the recording of work
carried out and the capture of costs. The choice of system will be dependent on the method of operation
chosen and the detail of financial and task interrogation required by the operator. The chosen system
should be compatible with the financial accounting system of the port or terminal.
The information should be available ‘live’ and also capable of preparing a monthly summary statement
for operating and maintenance hours, targets and actual maintenance costs incurred compared to
budget.
The chosen asset management system should cover all of the port facilities, equipment and
infrastructure of a container terminal.

5.6. Maintenance Personnel

Most container terminals operate on a 24/7 basis and, while delivering and receiving operations may
be limited to regular business hours, ship loading/unloading is often necessary on vessel arrival.
Therefore, it will be necessary to have maintenance staff available on a 24-hour basis to cover
breakdowns and emergency repairs. This is normally achieved by operating a 2 or 3 shift system. A
typical maintenance organisation is as shown in the diagram in Figure 5.2 below.
MANAGING DIRECTOR

OPERATIONS DIRECTOR

ENGINEERING MANAGER ADMINISTRATION CIVIL ENGINEER

PROJECT
MANAGER

CONTRACTS

MAINTENANCE MANAGER FACILITIES MANGER

MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL CRANE ELECTRONIS CIVILS BUILDINGS

SUPERVISORS SUPERVISORS SUPERVISORS SUPERVISORS SUPERVISORS SUPERVISORS

INSPECTORS INSPECTORS

MECHANICAL SHIFT ELECTRICAL SHIFT CRANE SHIFT

FOREMAN FOREMAN FOREMAN

CONTRACT DIRECT LABOUR CONTRACT DIRECT LABOUR

TRADES/OPERATIVES TRADES/OPERATIVES

IT MANAGER ADMINISTRATION

TECHNICAL STAFF

CONTRACT STAFF

Figure 5.2: Typical maintenance department organogram

118
5.7. Equipment
Following initial commissioning of equipment and the establishment of an engineering maintenance
workshop it will be necessary to provide appropriately trained maintenance personnel.
Planned preventive maintenance and statutory inspections of equipment are normally carried out during
the day shift when all specialist trades are available. Outside of the day shift minimal manning levels
are normally retained to cover breakdowns and emergency repairs only.
For other specialist areas such as IT and electronics it is usual to retain specialised personnel due to
the specific needs of such systems and equipment.
Mechanical and electrical engineering and IT personnel will be responsible for the daily maintenance
of cargo handling equipment and other aspects of the facility that require these skills and for specific IT
operating systems such as the TOS.
High voltage electrical cables and switchgear should be maintained by specialist contractors whilst
maintenance of low and medium cables and domestic electrics can be undertaken by electrical
tradesmen.

Figure 5.3: Maintenance on RMG

119
5.8. Infrastructure
Generally speaking the planned preventive maintenance of terminal equipment is taken for granted.
This is generally not the case for the maintenance of the container terminal infrastructure itself. For
example a quay structure with the exception of the fenders and quay furniture (bollards, ladders, etc.)
will often be assumed to perform throughout its design life with little or no maintenance. As a result in
respect of quay structures above and below water level it is often a case of ‘out of sight, out of mind’.
However, in order to ensure the infrastructure achieves its design life it is essential that inspection and
maintenance is carried out on a pre-determined regular basis.
In the case of quays, pavements and buildings, maintenance work is usually carried out during the
normal working week. It is likely that most of this work will be carried out by outside contractors although
it is generally more cost effective to have a dedicated in-house team retained for minor or emergency
repairs.
The Engineer and/or Facilities Manager who will be responsible for maintenance of all container
terminal infrastructure will have to consider preventative maintenance strategies, as well as having to
react to emergencies and replacement of elements of the facility. Records of previous maintenance
work carried out including the frequency and nature of the work together with the commensurate level
of expenditure will be helpful.

5.9. Planning and Design Optimisation of the Infrastructure to Reduce Future

Maintenance Costs
In keeping with the principles of Life Cycle Management it will be important to give consideration to the
optimisation of designs to ensure that future maintenance costs are kept to a minimum. It is
recommended that Whole of Life Costing is considered as an effective tool to evaluate important
alternatives for major elements of the infrastructure that will not only affect the capital cost of the project
but can also help to reduce future maintenance costs.
A number of these major elements of the proposed terminal facility are briefly discussed below.

5.9.1. Pavements
The choice of pavement will have a significant impact on the maintenance costs. The loading criteria
for each area will vary for different locations. For example container stacking areas have relatively high
point loads from container corner castings whilst roadways have lower loads with high levels of repeat
loadings.
It will therefore be uneconomic to design all areas to the highest loading and it will be important to
identify each area in order that the appropriate type of paving is used bearing in mind the need to retain
a degree of flexibility to accommodate potential future changes in use and the likely level of future
maintenance required.
Asphalt pavement typically requires higher annual maintenance expenditure than other pavement
types, such as concrete and concrete block paving, but generally has a lower capital cost.

5.9.2. Steelwork
It is advised that all general steelwork surfaces are protected against corrosion with appropriate paint
systems or galvanising as appropriate to provide the required durability and design life and in order to
minimise maintenance costs.
In addition, it is recommended that all steel piles should be provided with sacrificial anodes or current
impressed cathodic protection to negate the effects of normal splash zone corrosion, examples of which
is shown in Figures 5.4 and 5.5 below and the potential effects of Accelerated Low Water Corrosion
(ALWC

120
 Figure 5.4: Splash zone corrosion (above the waling beam)

Figure 5.5: Close-up view of splash zone corrosion

5.9.3. Utilities
Requirements for the following utilities will have to be agreed between the port and the potential
operator(s) bearing in mind any long-term maintenance implications:
- Water – potable mains distribution and hydrants and the collection, storage and use of collected
rainwater/grey water for non-potable use
- Electrical mains distribution
- Sewage – mains distribution and (if appropriate) treatment facilities

121
- Surface water drainage system – need for oil interceptors
- Area lighting – choice of mast, lattice or column
- Ducting – telecommunications and information technology cabling
- Fuelling – location and type of station(s) including bunding
- Fire – mains distribution and fire hydrants and the choice, location and capacity of the pumps

5.9.4. Fender Systems

It will be important to understand the type and size of fenders required for the range of vessels
anticipated to use the container terminal. Fenders are prone to ship damage and often require repair or
replacement. Ease of repair can be crucial to operational downtime due to berthing implications and
consideration must be given to the ability to carry out rapid and effective maintenance in all states of
the tidal range.

Damaged Rubber Units Damaged Frontal Frame

Figure 5.6: Damaged fender unit

Cell type fenders, incorporating low friction facing panels which provide the necessary hull protection
and resistance to berthing loads, are considered to be appropriate in most instances.

122
 Figure 5.7: Corroded frontal frame on cell fender

5.9.5. Bollards
It will be necessary to determine the size and capacity of bollards bearing in mind developments in
future vessel sizes. Generally, there are few day-to-day maintenance issues with bollards and ‘through
the deck’ fixings should be considered where possible for ease of removal for repair in the event of
major damage.

5.10. Maintenance Management

5.10.1. General
In many cases, the lifetime costs of maintaining the infrastructure will be in the range of 10-25 % of the
cost of the original investment. For plant and equipment the maintenance costs over the lifetime of the
asset can exceed the original purchase price.
It is of course possible to over maintain an asset and in some circumstances the cost to a business of
occasional breakdown of plant or equipment may be less that the cost of the maintenance input to
prevent the breakdown in the first place.
The use of planned preventive maintenance at pre-determined intervals including statutory inspections
is usually kept separate from the cost of corrective maintenance caused by a breakdown or accident.
A maintenance strategy, once adopted, will require any maintenance undertaken to be continuously
monitored and managed. In this way feedback from the monitoring will enable the strategy to be
reviewed on a regular basis if patterns of similar defects or repairs appear.
Continuous review of planned maintenance against what is actually happening will identify areas that
can be modified to improve the overall maintenance regime.

123
5.10.2. Operational Records
Records of work undertaken on structures, and equipment, form part of the continuing evaluation of the
performance of the facility and include the purchase and storage of spares. This information is used to
evaluate the actual and relative performance of structures and plant and equipment and for the pre-
ordering and stocking of spare parts.

5.10.3. Maintenance Costing

The costs of all the maintenance undertaken must also be recorded. Again comparison of actual costs
against the budgeted cost for items of work will identify areas that may give cause for concern or if
replacement or upgrading of equipment is required to avoid escalating maintenance costs of equipment
not performing to expected levels.

5.10.4. Operation and Maintenance Cost Planning

Generally, for most facilities, elements of structures and equipment which get the most use and/or
abuse can be easily identified. Fenders, for example, are sacrificial elements that are installed to protect
both the quay structure and the vessels in the normal functional life of a facility and as a result fender
units will require regular maintenance and replacement.
Generally, very little happens to the materials behind a sheet pile wall or buried tie-rods and dead man
anchors once post-construction movements have occurred.
If the various components of a facility are considered individually, then based on the number of times
that these components have to be replaced in the functional life of the structure the total maintenance
costs can be predicted.
Although the results obtained will not necessarily be exact, they will be useful in establishing
maintenance budgets. The actual year-to-year maintenance costs will vary but such a prediction model
will at least identify the likely level of total maintenance expenditure.
Of course this methodology will only account for the regular wear and tear that a terminal undergoes.
It will not account for accidental damage which is unpredictable by nature and/or definition.

5.10.5. Operation and Maintenance Performance Reviews

All of the work undertaken in monitoring the maintenance regime and the costs in undertaking the work
will form part of a review of the operational performance of the facility.
Reviewing the planned procedures and performance against the actual performance will identify areas
where improvements need to be made for the benefit of the operation of the facility as a whole. Areas
identified will need to be studied and the reasons why performance is not as planned will need to be
analysed to enable improvements to be implemented.

5.10.6. Structures and Facilities

Most items of equipment will be subject to planned preventive maintenance programmes as set out by
the manufacturers as well as periodic statutory inspections laid down by the statutory authorities and/or
insurance companies.
However, for structures and other facilities it will be necessary to develop site-specific maintenance
management programmes for the different types of structures and facilities including underwater
inspections.
In respect of the latter a useful publication to assist in the formulation of an inspection programme is
the American Society of Civil Engineers publication ‘Underwater Investigations Standard Practice
Manual 101’.

124
6. REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING
- United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (1985): “Port Development: A
Handbook for Planning in Developing Countries”, second edition.
- Agerschou et al. (2005): “Planning and Design of Ports and Marine Terminals”.
- Thoresen, C. (2005): “Port Design Handbook”.
- US Army Design Manual – EM 1110-2-1100 (Part V – Chapter 5 – Navigation Projects).
- IAPH (2001): “International Association of Ports and Harbours (IAPH) – Guidelines for Port Planning
and Design, Port Planning and Construction Committee”.
- PIANC Working Group 9: “Design of Modern Terminals”.
- PIANC Working Group 17: “Inspection, Maintenance and Repair of Maritime Structures Exposed to
Damage and Material Degradation Caused by Salt Water Environment”.
- PIANC Working Group 20: “Factors Involved in Standardising the Dimensions of Class Vb Inland
Waterways”.
- PIANC Working Group 22: “Guidelines for the Design of Armoured Slopes Under Open Piled Quay
Walls”.
- PIANC Working Group 34: “Seismic Design Guidelines for Port Structures”.
- PIANC Working Group 33: “Guidelines for the Design of Fender Systems”.
- PIANC Working Group 44: “Accelerated Low Water Corrosion”.
- PIANC Working Group 48: “Guidelines for Port Construction Related to Thrusters”.
- PIANC Working Group 49: “Horizontal and Vertical Dimensions of Channels”.
- PIANC Working Group 115: “Guidelines for the (Un)Loading of Container Vessels”.
- PIANC Working Groups 31 and 103: “Life Cycle Management of Port Structures”.
- Recommendations of the Committee for Waterfront Structures Harbour and Waterways, EAU 2004.
- Interpave – Heavy Duty Pavement Manual.
- The MARPOL Convention (International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973
and modified by the Protocol of 1978).
- International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code.
- Container Security Initiative (CSI).
- Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) Convention.
- ILO Convention 152 (1979) and the ILO Code of Practice (2003) (which deal with health and safety
of port labour).
- American Society of Civil Engineers: “Underwater Investigations Standard Practice Manual 101”.
- Atkins, W. H. (1983): “Modern Marine Terminal Operations and Management”, Oakland, CA: Port
of Oakland.
- Chen, T. (1998): “Planning Land Utilization of the Container Terminal — A Strategic Perspective”,
Transportation Planning Journal, 27(3), pp. 509-543.
- Frankel, E. G. (1987): “Port Planning and Development”, New York: Wiley.
- Itsuro, W. (2001): “Container Terminal Planning — A Theoretical Approach”, Leatherhead, UK:
World Cargo Publishing.
- Ligteringen, H. and Velsink, H., (2012): “Ports and Terminals”, VSSD, Holland.
- CHU, C-Y and HUANG, W-C. (2005): “Determining Container Terminal Capacity on the Basis of an
Adopted Yard Handling System”, Transport Reviews, Vol. 25, No. 2, 181-199.
- Dally, H. K. (1983): “Container Handling and Transport — A Manual of Current Practice”, London:
Cargo Systems IIR Publications Ltd.
- Dharmalingam, K. (1987): “Design of Storage Facilities for Containers”, a case study of Port Louis
Harbour, Mauritius, Ports and Harbors, pp. 27-31.

125
- Hoffmann, P. (1985): “Container Facility Planning: “A Case Description”, in: Port Management
Textbook Containerization, Bremen: Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics, pp. 353-364.
- Tsinker, G. (Editor) (2004): “Port Engineering: Planning, Construction, Maintenance and Security”,
John Wiley & Sons.

126
 APPENDIX I – CONTAINER TYPES

Standard container 20 ft, 40 ft and 40 ft High-Cube Version

Standard container with full steel box top, bottom and sides and end
doors

Hardtop Container 20 ft, 40 ft and 40 ft High-Cube Version

Standard container with a removable steel roof. Used for heavy or tall
cargoes – with loading from the top or side

Ventilated Container 20 ft
Especially for cargo which needs to be ventilated.

Refrigerated Container 20 ft, 40 ft and 40 ft High-Cube Version

The cooling is provided via a built-in electrically driven unit. Power is
supplied either through power grids on board or ashore, or by "clip-
on" diesel generators during land transport.

Porthole Type Container 20 ft and 40 ft

This container does not have a built in cooling unit. The cooling is
provided through openings (port holes) either by the ship's
refrigeration system, a land terminal or by a ‘clip-on’ refrigeration unit
during land transit.

Open-Top-Container 20 ft and 40 ft
Provided with removable tarpaulin. Especially for over-height cargo.
Loading from the top or side.

Flatrack 20 ft, 40 ft and 40 ft High-Cube Version

Especially for heavy loads and wide loads.

127
Platform 20 ft and 40 ft
Especially for heavy loads and oversized cargo.

Tank Container 20 ft
For the transport of liquids including foodstuffs, for example:
- Petrochemical products
- Alcohol
- Fruit juices
- Edible oils
- Food additives

Dry ISO containers are used for general purpose transportation. The cargo is loaded via doors at the
end of the container. They are totally enclosed, box type containers. These containers are also called
cube containers.
Thermal or insulated ISO containers are used to transport chilled and frozen goods. They are also
used for temperature sensitive products. These containers have insulated walls but they don't have a
refrigeration unit.
Refrigerated, or reefer, ISO containers are used when a steady temperature must be maintained
during transportation. They are the same as insulated containers but have a built in refrigeration unit.
Flat racks and platforms are used to transport heavy machinery. They have no side walls, but may
have end bulkheads. There are also collapsible flat rack containers. They are open sided containers
with end bulkheads that can be folded down when the rack is empty.
Open top containers are used to transport heavy, tall or hard to load cargo and bulk material, such as
coal or grain. They are box type containers with no top. They can be loaded from the top or end of the
container.
Tank type containers are used to transport liquid or bulk materials. They are manufactured with a
cylindrical tank mounted within a rectangular steel framework. They have the same overall dimensions
as other intermodal containers.
The standard sizes for containers are:
- width: 8 feet
- height: 8 feet 6 inches, 4 feet 3 inches and 9 feet 6 inches
- length: 20 feet and 40 feet
- less common lengths include 10, 24, 28, 20, 44, 45, 46, 48, 53, and 56 feet

128
APPENDIX II – OVERVIEW OF CONTAINER TRUCK REGULATION PER REGION

Max.
Type of
length Capacity Possible countries
vehicle
(m)
16.4 / 1*40 ft / 2*20 ft (not fully
Standard Most countries
18.75 loaded)
Extended US (but other countries allow the
19 45 ft and longer containers
standard transport of one 45 ft under restrictions)
1*40 ft and 1*20 ft / 3*20 ft / Sweden, Finland (on trial in another
Short LCV 25-26
2*20 ft fully-loaded European countries), Australia, Canada
Intermediate Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, US
30 2*40 ft
LCV (under restrictions)
Australia, US (on certain routes, under
Long LCV 53.5 3*40 ft
restrictions)

129
 APPENDIX III – TERMINAL MANAGEMENT MODELS

Model Type Main Characteristics

- Lease and Operate contract concluded between Port Authority and a private operator
for a pre-determined period of time typically varying between 5 to 25 years.
- Private operator is responsible for the operations of the facility and pays a lease
amount to Port Authority.
Lease, Operate and - Private operator supplies cargo handling equipment which may or may not revert to
Transfer (LOT) Port Authority at end of lease, alternatively the equipment may be included in the
lease.
- Suitable for projects where there is a benefit in Port Authority designing and
constructing the facility due to high (interface) risks.
- No construction is required.

- The generic approach in the development of new terminals.

- A private operator will build and operate the facility and will transfer it to Port Authority
at the end of the BOT contracting period.
- Private operator also supplies cargo handling equipment which reverts to Port
Build, Operate and Authority at end of lease
Transfer (BOT) - Private operator pays for part of investment, usually the superstructure including
paving, but may also include the quay wall and/or reclamation.
- It is a long-term contract, typically 20+ years.
- Most suitable if the scope of the project is clear with few long-term development issues.
- Usually a land fee is paid by private operator to Port Authority.

- A private operator will build, operate and own the facility and will transfer it to Port
Authority at the end of the BOOT contracting period.
- Private operator also supplies cargo handling equipment which reverts to Port
Authority at end of lease.
Build Operate Own - Private operator pays for part of investment, usually the superstructure including
and Transfer (BOOT) paving, but may also include the quay wall and/or reclamation.
- Legal title in the land is acquired directly by the operator.
- It is a long-term contract, usually 20+ years.
- Most suitable if the scope of the project is clear with few long-term development issues.
- Usually a land fee is paid by private operator to Port Authority.

- A cooperation agreement between governing authority and either end-users or a

private operator.
Joint Venture with end-
- Applied when the governing authority aims to keep maximum control of the
users or with Operator
development of facilities.
- Long-term contract.

130
Model Type Main Characteristics

- Private operator is responsible for the operations of the facilities with his own
organisation.
- Port Authority supplies cargo handling equipment which remains with Port Authority at
end of lease
Operating Contract
- Short-term contract of up to 5 years. Option for extension is possible.
- The operator receives an annual fixed and/or variable fee or may charge a handling
fee directly to the customers.
- Operator is not responsible for any construction.

- Contract of up to 5 years that leaves the management of the facility to a private

Management Contract operator.
- Private company is paid a management fee by Port Authority.

131
 PIANC Secrétariat Général
Boulevard du Roi Albert II 20, B 3
B-1000 Bruxelles
Belgique

http://www.pianc.org
VAT BE 408-287-945

ISBN 978-2- 87223-213-0

EAN 978287223213-0

978-2-87223-213-0