Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Abstract: In this paper, we study the design and control of automated guided vehicle (AGV)
systems, with the focus on the quayside container transport in an automated container terminal.
We first set up an event-driven model for an AGV system in the zone control framework.
Then a number of layouts of the road network (guide-path) are carefully designed for the
workspace of the AGVs in a container terminal. Based on our zone control model, a traffic
control strategy is proposed, which decouples the motion conflict resolution among the AGVs
from the routing problem. A routing algorithm is also constructed with the goal of minimizing
the vehicle travel distances and the transportation time. The efficiency of the integrated design
and control is demonstrated by computer simulations in terms of a set of defined measures of
system performance. Lastly, we point out several possibilities towards improving our current
results.
In this case study, we consider a typical large container Fig. 3. Event triggering of a vehicle: the small circle on
terminal with a TA of the dimension 2000m×40m; and 20 the vehicle indicates the reference position for event
QCs and 66 YSs distributed on the sea side and yard side triggering
respectively. In Figure 2, we illustrate the workspace of the Layout design for the quay area and yard area For
AGV system. simplicity, the road network has the same layout at each
QC or YS, which is illustrated in Figure 4. The buffer of a
QC or YS is modeled by the SZs on three different lanes
in between two crossings. The 2 in-lanes of one of the two
crossings (left one in Figure 4) allow vehicles to drive off
the TA and towards the QC or YS; while the 2 out-lanes
of the other crossing lead the vehicles back to the TA.
(c) to change its state to be moving from aip to aip+1 at any p ∈ Z1nk −1 . As remarked in Subsection 3.1, we
t + does not lead to a black cycle containing aip+1 ; also have bik+1,1 = bik,nk for any k ∈ ZM 1
i −1
. Assuming
then the vehicle changes its state at t + to be moving that biMi ,nM is a depot, if we glue the routes for all
i
from aip to aip+1 ; otherwise the vehicle will again intend to the tasks together and see the integrated zone sequence
leave aip at some time t0 > t + ∆, where ∆ > is some bi1,1 , · · · , bi1,n1 (bi2,1 ), · · · , bi2,n2 (bi3,1 ), · · · , biMi ,nM as a route
i
positive constant. In both cases, the vehicle releases the of vi , then by applying the traffic control above, we can
crossing token after making the decision. make sure that each vehicle will eventually finish all the
given tasks without colliding with others.
Note that to satisfy the token-holding requirement, a token An appealing advantage of the proposed traffic control
assignment algorithm is necessary as there can be multiple is that it offers a large extent of freedom in routing
vehicles waiting for the token simultaneously to trigger the AGVs. In fact, the route for each task of a vehicle
their “intend to leave” event. can be determined online rather than necessarily fixed
Here we introduce a token assignment algorithm, where a beforehand. Specifically, before vehicle vi arrives at the pth
central controller maintains an index list of the “starving” (p ≥ 2) zone of its route for the kth task bik,p , it may select
vehicles that have sent their token requests but not been any zone in Υbik,p as bik,p+1 provided that the dynamically
granted it yet. The position of the vehicle indices in the list established route will end up with the destination zone of
are ordered by their degrees of starvation: the one waiting the task.
for the longest time is on the top, and the one with the
shortest wait is at the bottom. Among the vehicles with 4.2 Routing algorithm
the same waiting time, the order is immaterial. The rules
for the token assignment are as follows.
As mentioned in the previous subsection, before a vehicle
arrives at some zone c it has some freedom to choose the
Crossing Token Assignment Algorithm next zone on its route out of the neighboring zones of
Step 1: Begins with assigning the token to the 1st c. But it is easy to see that if c is an off-crossing zone,
vehicle from the top. then c has only one neighboring zone. Therefore, the only
Step 2: If the token is released by the nth (not the last) case of interest is when c is an at-crossing zone. Roughly
vehicle without a state change of the vehicle, speaking, the routing algorithm introduced here ensures
then assign the token to the n + 1th vehicle. If that the vehicle always chooses a zone such that it will be
the token is released with a state change of the closer to the destination of its current task at the resulting
vehicle, then delete the nth (can be the last) next crossing. As a direct consequence, this guarantees the
vehicle from the list and assign the token to vehicle reach the destination in finite zones. Beyond this
the 1st vehicle. basic property, the algorithm also intends to “smooth” the
Step 3: If the last vehicle in the list releases the token motion of the vehicles as much as possible.
without a state change, assign the token to the Now suppose that cd is the destination zone of the current
1st vehicle in the list. task of some vehicle, which may be some zone of a QC, a
YSs or the depot. Then before arriving at some at-crossing
One can easily show that this algorithm feeds the token to zone c of crossing r ∈ R, the vehicle needs to select a
a vehicle in finite time after it requests it. The motivation zone out of the zones in Υc = Sr := {cis : li ∈ Or },
behind Step 2 is to balance the “degrees of starvation” of where Or = {li } is the set of out-lanes of crossing r
the competing vehicles: the state change of an at-crossing and cis denotes the SZ of li . For any zone c∗ , we use
vehicle may offer a chance for some others to leave their dm (c∗ , cd ) and xm (c∗ , cd ) to represent the length of the
current zones; and once such a possibility appears, the shortest route(s) between zone c∗ and cd and the smallest
token is fed to the vehicle that needs it most urgently. number of crossings a vehicle has to pass on a way running
This heuristic helps reduce the overall lateness (namely the from c∗ to cd .
tardiness specified in Section 5) of the container deliveries.
Before we state our routing algorithm, define two zone sets:
Γ1 = {cis ∈ Sr : dm (cie , cd ) < dm (c, cd )}, of 4 QCs; while the groups of the YSs are overlapping
with each group containing 24 YSs. For each vehicle, the
Γ2 = {c∗ ∈ Γ1 : c∗ is available}; source and destination zones for any task of the second
where cieis the EZ of the lane li (By assumption 1(a), cie type are randomly selected respectively from the zones of
is either an at-crossing zone or the EZ of the in-lane of the the related QC and YS groups (see Figure 10).
depot), and let
In addition, for the tasks of types (1) and (2), after a
∗ vehicle arrives at the destination zone of each task, it will
{c ∈ Γ2 : c∗ = argmin dm (c∗ , cd )}, if Γ2 6= ∅;
Γ3 = stay stationary in the zone for 30 seconds for a container
{c∗ ∈ Γ1 : c∗ = argmin dm (c∗ , cd )}, otherwise.
loading or discharging process before being assigned a new
task.
Online Vehicle Routing Algorithm
Step 1: If cd is on some lane lk ∈ Or , then choose the
zone cks ; otherwise go to Step 2.
Step 2: If #Γ3 = 1, then choose the single zone in Γ3 ;
otherwise go to Step 3.
Step 3: Let Γ4 = {c∗ ∈ Γ3 : c∗ = argmin xm (c∗ , cd )}.
If #Γ4 = 1, then choose the single zone in Γ4 ;
otherwise go to Step 4.
Step 4: If there is a zone c∗ in Γ4 to reach which the
vehicle does not need a turn, then c∗ is selected;
otherwise choose randomly a zone from Γ4 . Fig. 10. Task dispatching scheme
Remark 4. In each layout of the road network designed in
Subsection 3.2, the set Γ1 cannot be empty; and such a c∗ 5.2 Performance measures
in Step 4, if exists, must be unique.
Several performance measures are defined here in different
Note that to implement the routing algorithm above, one aspects of concern. The first measure is related to the
needs to maintain for each crossing r and each possible throughput of the terminal, called “average tasks per-
destination zone cd the data sets {dm (c, cd ) : c is any at- formed per hour” (ATP), which is defined as
crossing zone of r}, {dm (cis , cd ), xm (cis , cd ), dm (cie , cd ) : for
any li ∈ Or }. But for each given layout, these data can 3600
be generated and stored offline before the system starts AT P = , (1)
AT T
running. Therefore, the time complexity of the proposed
where ATT denotes the “average task time” calculated by
routing algorithm is very small.
PN PMi i
5. SIMULATION STUDIES i=1 j=1 Tj
AT T = PN , (2)
i=1 Mi
In this section, via computer simulations, we investigate
the performance of the AGV systems with the designs and with Tji the time (in second) for vehicle vi to complete its
controls presented in the preceding content. jth task. (Recall that N is the number of vehicles; and Mi
is the number of tasks for vehicle vi .)
5.1 Task dispatching scheme From an energy cost point of view, another performance
measure of interest is the “average travel distance” (ATD)
Here we introduce a simple stochastic task dispatching whose definition mimics that of ATT with Tji replaced by
scheme that is used to drive the simulations. We empha- Dji , the travel distance for the jth task of vi .
size that an in-depth discussion on this topic is beyond
the scope of the paper. See Steenken et al. [2004] and The last two performance measures, namely “average tar-
Stahlbock and Voß [2008b] for recent progress in the re- diness” (ATR) and “standard deviation of the tardiness”
search on this subject. (STDTR), indicate how much are the motions of the AGVs
delayed by the traffic. The formula for computing the ATR
There are three types of tasks for each AGV: has the same form as (2) but with Tji substituted by
(1) traveling from the depot to a zone of a QC or YS
(first task only); Dji = Tji − min time required to complete task j of vi
(2) traveling across the TA, i.e., from a zone of a QC to Here the second term on the right hand side is the time
a zone of a YS or the other way around; for vi to complete the task via the shortest route while
(3) traveling from a zone of a QC or YS to the depot (last assuming vi the only vehicle running in the workspace.
task only).
The STDTR is computed by
For the tasks of the second type, the source and destination
stations are not arbitrarily chosen. Instead, according to v
u PN PMi
a typical container transshipment scenario, the 20 QCs u i=1 j=1 (Dji − AT R)2
and 66 YSs are divided into 5 groups respectively. The ST DT R = t PN . (3)
groups of the QCs are disjoint, each of which consists i=1 Mi
5.3 Simulation results
800
2500
and big crossings, remains the best choice for this wide
2000
range of the size of the vehicle team. This result can be
roughly explained as follows: As mentioned in Subsection
per hour [Tasks/hour]
1500
3.2, the use of small crossings may have less vehicles
waiting at the crossings in the TA (not much less since
1000 simultaneous passings of a big crossing by two vehicles
are not necessarily conflict with each other). However, in
500 average, the travel distance of the vehicles in this case
is considerably larger than that in the case of using big
0
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 crossings (see Figure 14). The use of six roads, compared
Number of AGVs
with four roads, renders more space (lanes, zones) for
vehicles’ movement. But this benefit is offset by increased
Fig. 11. Average performed tasks per hour travel distances and number of vehicles competing for
crossings.
200
In addition, using Layout 2, one can see from Figures
Average tardiness for a task [Seconds]
Layout 1
180
Layout 2
12 and 13 moderate ATR and STDTR for a large team
160 Layout 3 of operational vehicles. This observation shows that by
Layout 4
140 the proposed design and control strategies, if the vehicles
120 in the system are dispatched in a random and uniform
100
manner, then even for a busy operation (1) the flow of the
vehicles is quite smooth, i.e. the motion of the vehicles are
80
not much interfered by the traffic; and (2) one can estimate
60
for each task the arriving time of the vehicle performing
40
the task with an acceptable error.
20
0
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
6. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSIONS
Number of AGVs
Layout 1
300 Layout 2 layouts are designed based on the practical dimension of
Layout 3
Layout 4
a container terminal. A traffic control scheme as well as
250 a routing algorithm are developed. Computer simulations
demonstrate the efficiency of our results in terms of some
200
defined performance measures.
150
For an interesting comparison, we also did computer sim-
100
ulations in which the AGVs are free ranging (no road net-
work is used), and the inter-vehicle collision avoidance are
50 realized by the so called potential field based approaches
[Whitcomb et al., 1992]. Our findings can be summarized
0
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 as follows. With a small amount of AGVs (N < 20), the
Number of AGVs
two methods are comparable: AGVs have similar average
task time and travel distances (the free ranging case can
Fig. 13. Standard deviation of the tardiness be a bit better). However, for a relatively large vehicle
fleet (N > 30), our method outperforms its free ranging portantion Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 30:
counterpart; and the differences of the performance mea- 21–34, 1996.
sures stand out as the size of the fleet increases. Based on M. P. Fanti, B. Maione, S. Mascolo, and B. Turchiano.
our observations, the main reason for this result is that a Event-based feedback control for deadlock avoidance in
large number of the nearly head-to-head motion conflict flexible production systems. IEEE Trans. on Robotics
resolutions, due to the narrowness of the transportation and Automation, 13:347–363, 1997.
area, heavily slow down the vehicles in the free ranging K. H. Kim and J. W. Bae. A dispatching method for auto-
case. mated guided vehicles to minimize delays of container-
ship operations. International Journal of Management
There are several possible directions for further research. Science, 5:1–25, 1999.
First, in our traffic control strategy, it is required that each K. H. Kim, S. M. Jeon, and K. R. Ryu. Deadlock
lane of the road network must contain at least two zones. prevention for automated guided vehicles in automated
To somehow weaken this restriction may be important for container terminals. OR Spectrum, 28:659–679, 2006.
some applications where the workspace of the AGVs is M. Lehmann, M. Grunow, and H.-O Günther. Deadlock
very limited. In addition, one could think of a relaxation of handling for real-time control of agvs at automated
the token-holding requirement in the traffic control scheme container terminals. OR Spectrum, 28:631–657, 2006.
so that multiple vehicles can leave different at-crossing Q. Li, J. T. Udding, and A. Y. Pogromsky. Mod-
zones simultaneously, and hence the performance of the eling and control of the AGV system in an auto-
AGV system can be improved. As far as we could tell, using mated container terminal. In Proc. of AsiaMIC 2010,
local crossing tokens, instead of a global one required in Phuket, Thailand, to appear, 2010. (available at
this work, and adding inter-crossing communications may http://w3.wtb.tue.nl/en/people pages/?script=
lead to a successful trial. showabstract.php&outid=12192).
The designs of the layout of the road network and the V. D. Nguyen and K. H. Kim. A dispatching method for
routing algorithm are vital to the performance of the automated lifting vehicles in automated port container
AGV system. The designs presented in this paper are terminals. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 56:
partially heuristic with the help of intuitions and practical 1002–1020, 2009.
experiences. Better results could be obtained by setting L. M. Rajeeva, H. G. Wee, W. C. Ng, C. P. Teo, and
up and solving formal optimization problems. Along this N. S. Yang. Cyclic deadlock prediction and avoidance
line of thinking, the balance between the optimality and for zone-controlled agv system. International Journal of
real-time applicability of the solutions become critical for Production Economics, 83:309–324, 2003.
practical applications. S. A. Reveliotis. Conflict resolution in agv systems. IIE
Transactions, 32:647–659, 2000.
In this work, the tasks of the AGVs are assigned in a R. Stahlbock and S. Voß. Vehicle routing problems and
purely random manner. We predict a room for perfor- container terminal operations - an update of research.
mance improvement in the future if a sophisticated task In S. Raghavan B. Golden and E. Wasil, editors, The
dispatching strategy could be incorporated, although we Vehicle Routing Problem - Latest Advances and New
have seen only a moderate tardiness for a typical number Challenges, pages 551–589. Springer, Berlin, 2008a.
of operational AGVs with our current strategy. Such a R. Stahlbock and S. Voß. Operations research at container
dispatching strategy is desired to work collaboratively with terminals: a literature update. OR Spectrum, 30:1–52,
the routing algorithm, and utilize the feedback of the real- 2008b.
time traffic flow information. D. Steenke, A. Henning, S. Freigang, and S. Voß. Routing
Another interesting topic is to equip the AGV system with of straddle carriers at a container terminal with the
some fault-tolerant mechanisms so that it can still run special aspect of internal moves. OR Spectrum, 15:167–
safely and smoothly with unexpected disturbances, such 172, 1993.
as abrupt changes of container delivery schedule and the D. Steenken, S. Voß, and R. Stahlbock. Container terminal
appearance of obstacles in the workspace, or even with operation and operations research - a classification and
some failures, such as the breakdowns of vehicles or cranes. literature review. OR Spectrum, 26:3–49, 2004.
I.F.A. Vis. Survey of research in the design and control
of automated guided vehicle systems. European Journal
REFERENCES Operation Research, 170:677–709, 2006.
L. L. Whitcomb, D. E. Koditschek, and J. B. D. Cabrera.
E. K. Bish, F. Y. Chen, Y. T. Leong, B. L. Nelson, Toward the automatic control of robot assembly tasks
J. W. Cheong Ng, and D. Simchi-Levi. Dispatching via potential functions: the case of 2-d sphere assem-
vehicles in a mega container terminal. OR Spectrum, blies. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Robotics and
27:491–506, 2005. Automation, Nice, France, 1992.
D. Briskorn, A. Drexl, and S. Hartmann. Inventory-based N. Q. Wu and M. C. Zhou. Modeling and deadlock
dispatching of automated guided vehicles on container avoidance of automated manufacturing systems with
terminals. OR Spectrum, 28:611–630, 2006. multiple automated guided vehicles. IEEE Trans. on
M. B. Duinkerken, J. A. Ottjes, and G. Lodewijks. Com- Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B: Cybernetics,
parison of routing strategies for agv systems using sim- 35:1193–1202, 2005.
ulation. In Proc. of the 2006 Winter Simulation Con- M. S. Yeh and W. C. Yeh. Deadlock prediction and
ference, Monterey, Canada, 2006. avoidance for zone-control agvs. International Journal
J. J. M. Evers and S. A. J. Koppers. Automated guided of Production Research, 36:2879–2889, 1998.
vehicle traffic control at a container terminal. Trans-