Deep water docking: Suape container
When it comes to deep water docking, the terminal of Suape container is the top terminal in Brazil. This means that this terminal dock a large number of containers every week. As this terminal grows, and a larger number of goods are being moved worldwide, they need to adapt. So, the question now is should Suape accept proposals from the user’s council so as to make the process of adaptation more efficient?
This report studies the proposals from the user’s council and if this company stands to gain anything based on the success of this proposal. (Forrester, 2013).
Elaboration of the Case
Mario Silveria is the Chief Operations Officer of Tecon Suape Company and is keen on the operation in the port to ensure there are minimal delays in the movement of vessels and containers in the terminal (Forrester, 2013). In the course of his activities, Silveira is advanced by Karl Norbert, the head of “CUTS-Tecon Suape Users Council”. Norbert is concerned with the enormous investments made by the shareholders and the vast costs they incur while they wait for a berth to dock at the Suape terminal. In light to these, Norbert and his team have come up with an elaborate compensation versus penalty plan that he thinks might benefit both parties (Louppova, 2017).
Problem Definition
Tecon Suape Container Terminal hosts seven oceanic haulers that run six diverse container strings and make eleven week-by-week dockings indefinite times of the week. In addition to this, the management of Suape has negotiations with another ocean carrier which might result to an additional two vessels docking every week (Forrester, 2013). It is an extra income to Tecon, and there is need to evaluate whether the proposal by the user’s council may affect this possible new client. There are serious concerns from Tecon CEO, Sergio Costa, and CCO, Alberto Villalobos regarding the margin of income from the proposal by Norbert versus the possible need for the council to have domination over the terminal and the potential hindrance to growth with other customers (Louppova, 2017).
Data Collection
|
ARRIVAL WINDOW |
PENALTY |
||||||
|
Arrival |
Early |
Late |
Arrival |
Dock |
Time (hours) |
Amount |
|
|
Tue 01:00 |
Mon 19:00 |
Tue 01:00 |
TRUE |
Tue 01:00 |
0 |
$0 |
|
|
Tue 07:00 |
Tue 00:00 |
Tue 06:00 |
FALSE |
Tue 07:00 |
0 |
$0 |
|
|
Tue 09:00 |
Tue 04:00 |
Tue 10:00 |
TRUE |
Wed 02:14 |
16.24 |
$20,000 |
|
|
Tue 15:00 |
Tue 09:00 |
Tue 15:00 |
TRUE |
Wed 08:47 |
17.79 |
$20,000 |
|
|
Wed 17:00 |
Wed 14:00 |
Wed 20:00 |
TRUE |
Wed 13:24 |
0 |
$0 |
|
|
Thu 01:00 |
Wed 21:00 |
Thu 03:00 |
TRUE |
Thu 08:19 |
5.33 |
$10,000 |
|
|
Thu 09:00 |
Thu 04:00 |
Thu 10:00 |
TRUE |
Thu 08:29 |
0 |
$0 |
|
|
Fri 10:00 |
Fri 08:00 |
Fri 14:00 |
TRUE |
Fri 01:47 |
0 |
$0 |
|
|
Fri 22:00 |
Fri 19:00 |
Sat 01:00 |
TRUE |
Fri 12:36 |
0 |
$0 |
|
|
Sat 03:00 |
Fri 22:00 |
Sat 04:00 |
TRUE |
Sat 03:03 |
0 |
$0 |
|
|
Sat 10:00 |
Sat 03:00 |
Sat 09:00 |
FALSE |
Sat 06:26 |
0 |
$0 |
|
|
$50,000 |
|||||||
|
Net |
$5,000 |
||||||
Model Formulation
Tecon Suape has made significant investments in new container handling equipment’s exceeding 100 million dollars. It includes a two Panamax, two Post Panamax, and two Super Post Panamax vessels to coastline gantry cranes (Forrester, 2013). According to Silveira, the terminal can achieve a gross output ratio ranging from 35 to 40 containers per hour. The gross productivity is attained as the total moves conducted between the first and the last movement without the inclusion of the stoppages and interruptions.
Model Validation
The methodology used by Silveira involved a proper analysis of the proposal brought to him by CUTS in two different stages. The first included an appropriate observation of the docking schedule of the carriers belonging to the users’ council and performance of a feasibility study. Second involved the determination of the economic impact the proposal will have on Tecon Suape considering the arrival schedule of the users’ council freight in comparison to the regular operations that is observed currently at the port (Forrester, 2013).
Interpretation of the Results
According to the Monte Carlo Simulation observed, the deviation in arrival time versus the late arrivals has a significant impact on Tecon Suape. Based on the simulation performed by the analyst there is a high percentage of early entries of 3 hours which equates to a substantial rise in income for the company (Forrester, 2013). However, there are notable delays of 3 hours and less in docking of users’ council vessels. Although, the net obtained in the income vs. penalty by the company provides them with an estimated net of $ 5,000.
Conclusion
The paper has analyzed the case of Tecon Suape based on the proposal brought to the COO, Mario Silveira, by the president of the users’ council, Karl Norbert. It is clear the shareholders’ proposal is important to them based on the cost they incur while waiting to dock at the terminal and the unnecessary speeds their vessels move which is costly to the host companies (Louppova, 2017). Based on the councils’ proposal, Silveira needs a proper Monte Carlo Simulation to work out the probability in this case for him to establish the financial impact this will have on Tecon Suape.
References
Louppova, J. (2017, April 18). A new container terminal for Suape, Brazil. Retrieved October 8, 2017, from https://port.today/new-container-terminal-suape-brazil/
Forrester, J. (2013). Supply Chain Modeling (4th ed.). Hollywood, FL: Fantasy Books.
Academic levels
Skills
Paper formats
Urgency types
Prices that are easy on your wallet
Our experts are ready to do an excellent job starting at $14.99 per page
We at GrabMyEssay.com
work according to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which means you have the control over your personal data. All payment transactions go through a secure online payment system, thus your Billing information is not stored, saved or available to the Company in any way. Additionally, we guarantee confidentiality and anonymity all throughout your cooperation with our Company.