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

Hosted by:

Added value of simulation in the

design of terminals

Vincent de Gast & Alessandro Nati

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

Hosted by:

Contents

• Introduction

• Liquid Bulk Terminals

• Complexities in liquid bulk terminal design

• Design process & simulation

• Case studies

• Conclusions

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

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 rate

Fit for purpose

Buffer storage terminal

Production plants High High

Independent storage terminal

Misc. mid long term (strategic storage)

Low Medium

Trading terminal Short term storage

Very high Low

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

Designed for a specific application or for a broader scope of

products and services

Hosted by:

Design of terminals is complex..


Complex terminal infrastructure:

- Headers

- Pumps

- Jetty lines

- Tanks

- Jetties

- Loading arms

- Pumping platform

Berth selection rules

Board to board

operations Bunkering

Different vessel

mix per customer

Access channel

Rail and Truck loading

Berthing processes:

- Paperwork

- Prepump

- Pump

- Postpump

Uncertain weather conditions

Limited number of tugs

Uncertain vessel arrivals

Blending processes

Changing customer profiles

Vessel

characteristics

Personnel requirements

Multiple parcels

Tank selection

Dedicated infrastructure

Vessel priorities

Hosted by:

Simulation and the terminal lifecycle


Design

Build

Operate Maintain

Improve

Replace

Greenfield terminal: - simulation modeling

Hosted by:

Terminal design questions..


What are the optimal pump rate

requirements for our new terminal?

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

terminal?

Can the envisioned terminal layout handle expected throughput?

Different users with different questions, which are hard to quantify

Terminal manager Operational excellence Business developers Sales managers Planners

What is the best design for our new terminal?

How many jetties do we need?

What is the expected waiting time for our

customers?

Hosted by:



Design

Build

Operate Maintain

Improve

Replace

Brownfield terminal: - scheduling/planning -

- serious gaming -

Hosted by:

Operating existing terminals…


Can we handle new customer X to the

terminal?

Vessel Y is delayed by 6hrs, can we still accept and what

are the consequences?

When can we schedule maintenance with least

impact?

If we receive this spot vessel, what is the

impact on our terminal?

What is the effect of a new product group to the

terminal?



Hosted by:



Design

Build

Operate Maintain

Improve

Replace

Brownfield terminal: - simulation modeling

Hosted by:

Improving existing terminals…


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?

What is the impact on my berth occupancy when we

add new jetty-pit connections?

Can the current terminal layout handle future

throughput?

Can the expenses of a new jetty be justified?



Hosted by:

Design process

Design timeline… from idea to reality


Basic design Detailed design

Client input

Site characteristics

Basic Storage/throughput

demands

A

B

C

Alt

ern

ativ

e d

esi

gns

Data availability increases

Decision

Decision

Detailed equipment specification

Dimensioning of tanks

Hosted by:

How to apply simulation…


Objective (Throughput, Customers) Constraints (Ship types, Port, Products)

Alternatives

Throughput # Customers Ships Port Products

3 different variants 2 different variants 3 different vessel mix 2 different variants 3 different variants

108 possible combinations

Now run the simulation and get the results….

Alternative 1 Berth Occupancy

Waiting time


Waiting time


Waiting time

Alternative n Berth Occupancy

Waiting time

The simulation results provide insight in the performance over time

This number changes when more data

becomes available

Hosted by:

Now apply variability…



Waiting time


Waiting time


Waiting time

Alternative n Berth Occupancy

Waiting time

Weather scenario’s Failures Arrival patterns

Now make a better informed decision

Hosted by:

Added value of simulation


Design

Build

Operate Maintain

Improve

Replace

4 or 5 berths? Enough connection lines?

12.45 pm – Santa Clara – Berth 4 14.30 pm – Liz Krogsund – Berth 1

------------------------------- (How) Can we handle this

new customer?

What if we change our berth/tank allocation?

Should we add more ....?

Lower CAPEX

Better service

Higher efficiency

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 2 •Each finger pier has 3 jetty. •If VLCC is at jetty the whole finger pier is seized •No “South Dock”

Layout options

20

Your company logo

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

Layout 1 •Each finger pier has 1 jetty to handle all vessel types •“South Dock” can handle MD (Middle distillate) and FO (Fuel Oil) Aframax, Handymax , Handy)

Hosted by:

Case 1: Results


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

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

Berth occupancy layout 2 (%)

Blocked

Occupied

Layout 1 performs better because: •VLCC and Suezmax are no longer blocked from Handymax/Handy vessels at finger piers and therefore their waiting time is reduced •Handymax and Handy vessels benefit from “South dock” because they can be served when 2 big vessels are moored at the finger pier at the same time

Hosted by:

TO BE+ 2 MR FO VESSEL

PER MONTH

AS IS:147 KBD CRUDE

TO BE+ 1 MR CLEAN

VESSEL PER MONTH

TO BE:157 KBD CRUDE

TO BE:167 KBD CRUDE

AS IS: 32" LINE FOR CRUDE

TO BEUSE OF NEW LINE FO

TO BEUSE OF NEW CLEAN LINE

TO BE: 32" LINE ALSO FOR FO

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

• Relation between berth occupancy & demurrage:

• While increasing production rates from 147 KBD to 167 KBD • Optional use of dedicated or new loading line for:

• Fuel oil vessel • Clean vessels

Hosted by:

Case 2: Main scenarios and results


Scenario NameBerth

Occupancy

Cycle time

(in hrs)

Number of

ships

Demurrage

(in K$)Investment

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:

Results from further scenarios with different refinery rates, fleet composition, pump rates: •Berth occupancy and demurrage cost have an exponential correlation •For Berth occupancy higher than 65% the demurrage cost dramatically increases •This chart suggests that handling CLEAN MR vessels (berth occupancy to 64%) is risky as the demurrage cost might easily be higher than expected

Case 2: Occupancy vs demurrage


0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

50 55 60 65 70 75

BERTH OCCUPANCY (%)

Annual Demurrage Cost in K$ vs Berth Occupancy

Scenarios with berth outages Scenarios with longer lay-can period

Hosted by:

Case 3: Expansion existing terminal


Background information: •Terminal expects an increase of tonnage handled with vessels •Current bathymetry allows ships to be handled on “Vessel 1, 2, 3”. Barge “1, 2, 3” can only serve barges •Vessels have priority over barges •Investment decisions:

•Dredge and renew “Barge 3” to accommodate vessels (cheaper, risk of further delays on barges) •Build “Vessel 4” but use jetty lines and headers from “Barge 3”

VESSEL 3

VESSEL 2

VESSEL 1

BA

RG

E 1

VESSEL 4

BARGE 3 BARGES ONLY

VESSELS ONLY

VESSELS ONLY

ALL SHIPS

BARGES ONLY

BARGES ONLY

ALL SHIPS

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:


Visit our website: www.systemsnavigator.com

Systems Navigator B.V.

Delftechpark 38

2628 XH Delft

The Netherlands

Thanks for your attention…

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

Technology

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