Container moves per lift: the impact of spreader technology on bay time

Shmuel Z. Yahalom, Changqian Guan, Elizabeth Langmaid


The trend of increasing containership size (length, beam, and draft) continues. The increase in containership size, especially beam size (bay size), increased berth and port time at a given number of lifts per hour. There are emerging technologies that allow a spreader of ship-to-shore gantry to handle multiple containers in a single lift.  This paper studies the impact of the increase in the containership bay size on berth time and the role the spreader of gantry cranes can play in keeping up with the increase of bay size, thus reducing vessel port time. The paper analyzes the moves of containers per lift with different spreader technologies, where a spreader can handle one or multiple containers in one lift. The paper determines the combination of spreader technology needed to accommodate mega containerships with large bay sizes in order to reduce vessel port time. After a literature review, using the bay time determination method developed by the authors, the paper analyzes the moves per lift of different spreader technologies, vessel operations and containership bay size configurations. The analysis determines the optimal combination of equipment to comply with liner service schedules and the difficulties the equipment might pose on a marine container terminal.

Full Text:



Bartosek, A., Marek, O., 2013, Quay Cranes in Container Terminals. Transaction of Transport Sciences. Volume 6, 9-18.

Chao, Shih-Liang., and Lin, Yu., 2011, Evaluating advanced quay cranes in container terminals. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 47, Issue 4, 432-445.

Choi H., S, Won H., S, & Lee, C., 2013, Comparison of alternative ship-to-yard vehicles with the consideration of the batch process of quay cranes. International Journal of Industrial Engineering. 20(1-2), 84-98.

Choi, S., Im, H., and Lee, C., 2014, Development of an operating system for optimization of the container terminal by using tandem-lift quay crane. Future Information Technology, 399-404

Choo, Shawn, Diego Klabjan and David Simchi-Levi, 2010, Multiship Crane Sequencing with Yard Congestion Constraints, Transportation Science, Vol. 44, No. 1 (February), pp. 98-115

Delgado A., Jensen R.M., Janstrup K., Rose TH., Andersen K.H., 2012, A constraint programming model for fast optimal stowage of container vessel bays. European Journal of Operational Research, 220(1), 251-261.

Diabat, Theodorou, A, E., 2014, An integrated quay crane assignment and scheduling problem. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 73:115-123

Goodchild, A. V., 200, Crane double cycling in container ports: algorithms, evaluation, and planning, PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.

Goodchild, A. V., & Daganzo, C. F., 2006, Double-cycling strategies for container ships and their effect on ship loading and unloading operations. Transportation Science, 40(4), 473–483.

Goodchild, A. V., & Daganzo, C. F., 2007, Crane double cycling in container ports: Planning methods and evaluation. Transportation Research Part B, 41(8), 875–891.

Hay, Cameron, 2016, Trends in multiple lifting, Spreader Container, World Port Development, International Journal For Port Management, June,

Huang X., Shi F., Zhang H., 2012, SVM-Based Fuzzy Rules Acquisition System for Twin-Lift Spreader System, Chapter 9, 75-81. In: Wang X., Wang F., Zhong S. (eds) Electrical, Information Engineering and Mechatronics 2011. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol 138. Springer, London. Retrieved from

Hyongmo, J., 2015, The era of mega vessels and challenges to ports. Pacific Economic Cooperation Council, October, Retrieved from

Jiang Xinjia, , Ek Peng and Loo Hay Lee, 2015, Innovative Container Terminals to Improve Global Container Transport Chains, Chapter 1 in Lee Chung Yee and Qiang Meng, (2015) Handbook of Ocean Container Transport Logistics, Making Global Supply Chain Effective, International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, Springer.

Johansen Robert S., 2007, Twin-40 Container Operations … The Landside Part of the Equation, AAPA Facilities Engineering Seminar, JWD Group, A division of DMJM Harris, November,

Jordan, Michael, 2013, “Evolution of STS Cranes”, World Port Development, May.

Kim, Kap Hwan and Hoon Lee, 2009, Trends and Future Challenges, Chapter 2, Container Terminal Operations: Current,

Lashkari, S., Wu, Y., and Petering E.H., M., 2017, Sequencing duel spreader crane operations: Mathematical formulation and heuristic algorithm. European Journal of Operational Research. Edition 262, 521-534.

Lind, Derrick, Jonathan K. Hsieh and Michael A. Jordan, 2007, Tandem-40 Docking Container Crane and Their Impact on Terminals, Liftech, ASCE Ports 2007 Conference, San Diego, CA.

Louppova Julia , 2016, A 6-at-a-time spreader to handle empties, Port Today, November 3.

MAREX, 2016, New System Promises Faster Handling for Empties.

OECD/ITF, 2015, The impact of Mega-ships, International Transportation Forum

Perina, O., & Barrons, A., 2015, Terminal Productivity: Optimizing the operational frontline. Port Technology, 66, August, Retrieved from

Port of Rotterdam, (2015, APM Terminals Rotterdam the most productive terminal in Europe, September 14, Retrieved from

Sea Trade Maritime News, 2018, Infrastructure costs need to be considered in building 24,000 teu boxships,

Soderberg Erik, Michael Jordan and Simo Hoite, 2016, Concept High Productivity STS Cranes, Liftech Consulting Corp., ASCE Copri Ports 2016 Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Song, J., n.d., Tandem operation and double cycling in container terminals. Port Technology: Edition 51. Retrieved from ls

Tierney, K., S. Voß, R. Stahlbock, 2013, A mathematical model of inter-terminal transportation. Technical report, IT University of Copenhagen, Rotterdam.

van, Marle, Gavin, 2015, Top 20 Ports: The productivity challenge, Container shipping trade, Lloyds Register, Sept. 04,top-20-ports-the-productivity-challenge_39089.htm

Wikipedia, 2017, List of largest container ships,

World Cargo News, 2007, Container crane productivity and double cycling debate, July

Yahalom, Shmuel Z. and Changqian Guan, 2016, “Containership Port Time: The Bay Time Factor,” Maritime Economics & Logistics, ISSN: 1388-1973, December, pp 1-17, online: September 12, 2016 (DOI: 10.1057/s41278-016-0044-6).

Yahalom, Shmuel Z. and Changqian Guan, 2017, “Containership Bay Time and Crane Productivity: Are They on the Path of Convergence?” International Association of Maritime Economists, 2017, Kyoto, Japan, June, 27-30.

Yi, Lin, Li Zhiyong, Tian Xiaofeng,(2016, Comparison and Selection of Twin 40 Quay Crane for Automated Terminal, Port & Waterway Engineering, No. 9, 519, September, https://www.ramspreaders.com0/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/TANDEM-LIFT-ARTICLE.pdf

Zhang, H. P., & Kim, K. H., 2009, Maximizing the number of dual-cycle operations of quay cranes in container terminals. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 56(3), 979–992.

ZPMC, n.d, Semi-automatic,

ZPMC, n.d., Spreaders. Retrieved from



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2023 Shmuel Z. Yahalom, Changqian Guan, Elizabeth Langmaid

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

The International Maritime Transport and Logistics Journal (MARLOG)

E-ISSN: 2974-3141
P-ISSN: 2974-3133

Published by:

Academy Publishing Center (APC)

Arab Academy for Science, Technology and Maritime Transport (AASTMT)

Alexandria, Egypt