Systems Navigator - Added value of simulation in the design of terminals

Added value of simulation in the
design of terminals

Vincent de Gast &
Alessandro Nati

Hosted by:

November 8, 2011 Added value of simulation in the design of terminals 1

Contents

• Introduction
• Liquid Bulk Terminals
• Complexities in liquid bulk terminal design
• Design process & simulation
• Case studies
• Conclusions

Hosted by:


Systems Navigator

Our references in simulating liquid bulk terminals

Hosted by:


Liquid bulk terminals

Industrial facility that offers a package of activities
– to handle, store and control liquid bulk (Oil,
Chemicals, LNG)
– To and from transportation modes (Ships, trucks,
trains and pipelines)

Hosted by:


Liquid bulk terminal functions

• Primary functions:
– Connect different modalities to maintain logistic
flow in supply chain
– To store product temporarily (buffer for differences
in supply and demand, scheduling or for strategic
reasons)
– Change the product flow size
• Secondary functions:
– Value added logistics (e.g. Blending)

Hosted by:


Types of liquid bulk terminals

Type Use Tank turnover Fit for purpose
rate Designed for a specific
application or for a
broader scope of
products and services
Buffer storage Production plants High High
terminal

Independent Misc. mid long Low Medium
storage terminal term (strategic
storage)

Trading terminal Short term Very high Low
storage

Source: The added value of simulation during liquid bulk terminal design R. van Duijn, H.P.M. Veeke, T.N. Brans, G. Lodewijks

Hosted by:


Design of terminals is complex..

Tank selection
Access channel

Rail and Truck loading
Blending processes
Personnel requirements
Dedicated infrastructure

Complex terminal infrastructure:
Berth selection rules
- Headers
- Pumps
Board to board - Jetty lines
Bunkering
operations - Tanks
- Jetties
- Loading arms
- Pumping platform

Different vessel
mix per customer
Vessel
characteristics

Multiple parcels

Changing customer profiles Vessel priorities
Berthing processes:
- Paperwork
- Prepump
Limited number of tugs - Pump
- Postpump

Uncertain vessel arrivals
Uncertain weather conditions

Hosted by:


Simulation and the terminal lifecycle

Greenfield terminal:
- simulation modeling
Replace Design

Improve Build

Maintain Operate

Hosted by:


Terminal design questions..

Different users with different questions, which are hard to quantify

Can the envisioned
terminal layout handle How many jetties
expected throughput? do we need? What are the optimal
pump rate
requirements for our
new terminal?

What is the effect of
What is the expected having a different
waiting time for our vessel mix at the
customers? terminal?

What is the best design
for our new terminal?

Terminal manager Business developers Sales managers Operational excellence Planners
Hosted by:



Replace Design

Improve Build

Brownfield terminal:
Maintain Operate - scheduling/planning -
- serious gaming -

Hosted by:


Operating existing terminals…


When can we schedule Can we handle new
maintenance with least customer X to the
impact? terminal?

Vessel Y is delayed by 6hrs,
What is the effect of a new can we still accept and what
product group to the are the consequences?
terminal?

If we receive this spot
vessel, what is the
impact on our terminal?

Hosted by:



Replace Design

Brownfield terminal:
- simulation modeling

Improve Build

Maintain Operate

Hosted by:


Improving existing terminals…


Can the current terminal Can the expenses of a
layout handle future new jetty be justified?
throughput?

What is the impact on my
berth occupancy when we
add new jetty-pit
connections? What is the impact when
adding (an) additional
customer(s) to the terminal?

What is the effect of
having a different vessel
mix at the terminal?

Hosted by:


Design process

Design timeline… from idea to reality
Basic design Detailed design
Site
characteristics Detailed equipment
specification
Basic
Storage/throughput
demands
Client Dimensioning of
input tanks
Alternative designs

A
Decision
B
Decision
C

Data availability increases
Hosted by:


How to apply simulation…

Objective (Throughput, Customers)
Constraints (Ship types, Port, Products)
This number changes
Alternatives when more data
becomes available
Throughput 3 different variants
# Customers 2 different variants
Ships 3 different vessel mix 108 possible combinations
Port 2 different variants
Products 3 different variants

Now run the simulation and get the results….

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative n
Berth Occupancy Berth Occupancy Berth Occupancy Berth Occupancy
Waiting time Waiting time Waiting time Waiting time

The simulation results provide insight in the performance over time

Hosted by:


Now apply variability…

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative n
Berth Occupancy Berth Occupancy Berth Occupancy Berth Occupancy
Waiting time Waiting time Waiting time Waiting time

Weather scenario’s Failures Arrival patterns

Now make a better informed decision

Hosted by:


Added value of simulation

4 or 5 berths?
Enough connection lines?

Replace Design

What if we change our
berth/tank allocation? Lower CAPEX
Should we add more ....?

Improve Build
Higher efficiency

12.45 pm – Santa Clara – Berth 4
14.30 pm – Liz Krogsund – Berth 1
-------------------------------
(How) Can we handle this
new customer?
Maintain Operate
Better service

Hosted by:


Case studies

3 Cases show examples of design decisions that
were made using simulation models
– Terminal layout selection
– Improving throughput of refinery
– Expansion of an existing terminal

Hosted by:


Case 1: Terminal layout selection
Background information:
• Greenfield project > 40,000,000 M3 annual throughput

• Products stored:
– Crude
– Middle distillates
– Fuel Oil

• Modalities served:
– Ships (Barges, Handy, Handymax, Aframax, Suezmax, VLCC)
– Pipelines

• Objective: Evaluate 2 proposed terminal layouts
– Required number of berths
– Determine individual berth requirements
– Determine infrastructure requirements

Hosted by:


Layout options
Layout 1 Layout 2
•Each finger pier has 1 jetty to handle all •Each finger pier has 3 jetty.
vessel types •If VLCC is at jetty the whole finger pier is
•“South Dock” can handle MD (Middle seized
distillate) and FO (Fuel Oil) Aframax, •No “South Dock”
Handymax , Handy)

Your company logo

Hosted by:


Case 1: Results

Layout 1 performs better because:
•VLCC and Suezmax are no longer blocked
Berth occupancy layout 2 (%) from Handymax/Handy vessels at finger
100
piers and therefore their waiting time is
90

80
reduced
70 •Handymax and Handy vessels benefit
60

Blocked
from “South dock” because they can be
50

40
Occupied served when 2 big vessels are moored at
30 the finger pier at the same time
20

10

0
FP W1 FP W2 FP W3 FP E1 FP E2 FP E3

Hosted by:


Case 2: Refinery throughput increase

Background information:
• Simulation study for the waterfront of a refinery

• Refinery has 1 MBM berth to import crude and
feedstock
AS IS: TO BE: TO BE:
147 KBD CRUDE 157 KBD CRUDE 167 KBD CRUDE

• Relation between berth occupancy
& demurrage:
• While increasing production rates TO BE TO BE
+ 2 MR FO VESSEL + 1 MR CLEAN
from 147 KBD to 167 KBD PER MONTH VESSEL PER MONTH

• Optional use of dedicated or new
loading line for:
• Fuel oil vessel
• Clean vessels TO BE
USE OF NEW LINE FO
AS IS:
32" LINE FOR CRUDE
TO BE
USE OF NEW CLEAN LINE
TO BE:
32" LINE ALSO FOR FO

Hosted by:


Case 2: Main scenarios and results

Berth Cycle time Number of Demurrage
Scenario Name Investment
Occupancy (in hrs) ships (in K$)

140 KBD as is 50,45% 39.12 127 253 NO
147 KBD 49,54% 41.54 120 401 NO
157 KBD 54,07% 45.23 135 512 NO
167 KBD 56,81% 47.14 144 429 NO
147 KBD + 2 FO MR 32' MBM line for FO 66,23% 62.23 146 3,669 NO
147 KBD + 2 FO MR Existing dedicated line for FO 66,38% 54.38 146 3,648 $
147 KBD + 2 FO MR New line for FO 59,35% 50.35 146 1,432 $$
147 KBD + 2 FO MR +1 CLEAN MR - New line for FO -
new line for CLEAN 64,73% 59.73 158 2,383 $$$

Conclusions:
•Addition of 2 FO MR vessels per month has relevant impact on demurrage cost
•Use of existing line for FO makes no difference (no change overs but it has a slow rate)
•Use of new dedicated FO line reduces the berth occupancy below 60% (faster pump rate
and no changeover)
•Handling 1 CLEAN MR vessel per month requires use of dedicated infrastructure and has
relevant impact on berth occupancy and demurrage cost.

Hosted by:


Case 2: Occupancy vs demurrage

Annual Demurrage Cost in K$ vs Berth Occupancy Results from further scenarios
12,000
with different refinery rates, fleet
composition, pump rates:

10,000
•Berth occupancy and demurrage
cost have an exponential
8,000 correlation
•For Berth occupancy higher than
6,000
65% the demurrage cost
dramatically increases
•This chart suggests that handling
4,000
CLEAN MR vessels (berth
occupancy to 64%) is risky as the
2,000 demurrage cost might easily be
higher than expected
0
50 55 60 65 70 75
BERTH OCCUPANCY (%)

Scenarios with berth outages Scenarios with longer lay-can period
Hosted by:


Case 3: Expansion existing terminal

Background information: VESSEL 4 ALL SHIPS

•Terminal expects an increase of
BARGE 3 BARGES ONLY
tonnage handled with vessels
VESSEL 3 VESSELS ONLY
•Current bathymetry allows ships to
be handled on “Vessel 1, 2, 3”. VESSEL 2 VESSELS ONLY

Barge “1, 2, 3” can only serve barges
VESSEL 1 ALL SHIPS
•Vessels have priority over barges

•Investment decisions: BARGES ONLY
•Dredge and renew “Barge 3”
to accommodate vessels

BARGE 1
BARGES ONLY
(cheaper, risk of further delays
on barges)
•Build “Vessel 4” but use jetty
lines and headers from “Barge
3”
Hosted by:


Case 3: Results

Conclusions:
•As expected addition of a new jetty that
can handle both vessels and barges gives
higher flexibility to the terminal.
•Dredging jetty “Barge 3” increases waiting
time for barges (because of the reduction
of barge-dedicated jetties)

Hosted by:


Conclusions

• Close integration of simulation during the entire
design phase helps to raise questions that
otherwise are unnoticed
• Simulation helps to quantify design decisions
• Simulation provides important insight into the
behavior of a liquid bulk terminal under varying
conditions (peak load, bad weather, failures)
• Scenario comparisons, and quick response to
new data are key to successful terminal design

Hosted by:


Thanks for your attention…
Visit our website: www.systemsnavigator.com
Systems Navigator B.V.
Delftechpark 38
2628 XH Delft
The Netherlands

Hosted by:


Systems Navigator - Added value of simulation in the design of terminals

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (9)

Similar to Systems Navigator - Added value of simulation in the design of terminals

Similar to Systems Navigator - Added value of simulation in the design of terminals (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Systems Navigator - Added value of simulation in the design of terminals