project enable - trimis · practices handbook”. d2.1 is mainly oriented towards industrial and...

SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

Coordination and Support Actions (Supporting)

Grant Agreement No: 233910

Project ENABLE Stimulate Sustainable Freight Transport Systems with

Latin American countries

Deliverable D2.2 Freight Transport Innovations List

Version: Final

Date: December 2010

Dissemination level: Public

Deliverable code: D2.2

Deliverable D2.2:

Freight Transport Innovations List

December 2010 page 2

PROJECT INFORMATION Title: Stimulate Sustainable Freight Transport Systems with

Latin American countries Acronym: ENABLE Grant Agreement no: 233910 Programme: 7th Framework Programme Funding Scheme: Coordination and Support Actions (Supporting) Start date: 1st September 2009 Duration: 24 months Web site: www.enable‐project.net

CONTROL SHEET Version history

Version number

Total Pages

Date Main author Contributors Summary of changes

0.5 98 August 2010 Yannis Tyrinopoulos, CERTH/HIT

1 152 December 2010

Maria Chatziathanasiou, CERTH/HIT

Yannis Tyrinopoulos, CERTH/HIT; Karri Rantasila, VTT

Input from D2.1, new projects added and 1st ENABLE Conference

Abstract

The deliverable D2.2 composes one of ENABLE project’s documents which aims at providing European research innovations and emerging ideas, guided from a strong technological character, to the specific and already identified barriers, challenges and needs of the LA countries of Argentina and Brazil.

Approval

Prepared CERTH/HIT 21st of December 2010

Reviewed CERTH/HIT 23rd of December 2010

Authorized CERTH/HIT 23rd of December 2010

Circulation

Recipient Date of submission

European Commission 23rd of December 2010

Deliverable D2.2:



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This deliverable is part of the ENABLE project, which aims at addressing freight transport between EU and the Latin America countries, specifically Argentina and Brazil, as well as stimulating sustainable transport systems in the area of co‐modality and intermodality. The project’s overall approach falls within the scope of EU for promoting its external relations through networking and partnership actions. These actions are set to provide multiple gains for both EU and related sides, such as environmental gains, useful know‐how transfer, boosting of competitiveness, strong trade relationships, and more.

Within the previous technical activity of the project documented in the deliverable D1.1 (“Current Status of Freight Transport in Brazil and Argentina, and EU‐LA Transport and Business Relations”), a thorough current situation analysis regarding the local and regional freight transport needs, weaknesses and barriers was conducted. The approach was further enhanced with findings from the project’s forums and other events (project’s first major conference). This enabled the identification and outlining of research priorities in the target areas of Argentina and Brazil. The current deliverable addresses these priorities by depicting a sound review of the European research projects and innovations in the field of intermodal freight transport.

In order for the research best practices to be identified within the vast “library” of European research and development initiatives, and to be presented in a concise manner, a robust methodology has been applied, which integrates into a solid working framework: the local problems, needs and research priorities; criteria of identification, review of EU R&D efforts/achievements and actions of research organizations; and a solid template for the description of the each research project.

A comprehensive overview of the research in Europe is presented, covering key research efforts and achievements in freight Intelligent Transport System (ITS), as well as major organizations conducting research in Europe.

The criteria used for the selection of the European research innovations and emerging ideas derive from the key barriers and obstacles for intermodal freight transport in LA, as identified in D1.1 and the conclusions and recommendations drawn from the events that took place in the LA countries of Brazil and Argentina.

16 European research projects have been described. These research best practices are clustered into seven thematic areas: 1) Long door‐to‐door transport chains, 2) Intelligent technologies, 3) Standardization, 4) E‐Logistics, 5) Dangerous goods, 6) Container management and 7) Border crossing operations management. These areas simplify the whole approach and also provide the following key aspects to be applied in the LA countries:

• Advanced technologies for facilitating intercontinental freight transport flows.

• ICT technologies for cargo inspection and control.

• Standardization and harmonization of intermodal freight transport procedures.

• Optimization of logistics chain within the scope of co‐modality.

• Systems for dangerous goods vehicle routing, monitoring, enforcements and driver support.

• ICT technologies and smart equipment for container handling.

Deliverable D2.2:



• Measures for the improvement of the efficiency and effectiveness of border crossing operations.

A preliminary analysis is conducted for the chosen cases in order to define the level of their transferability to the target LA countries and the abstract implementation actions, which have to be taken for the successful implementation and deployment of the proposed innovations to the Argentinean and Brazilian areas.

All the above analysis actions conclude to a comprehensive research reply – though entailing a strong technological character, to the identified barriers, needs and research priorities of the LA countries.

Deliverable D2.2:



CONTENTS 1. Introduction _______________________________________________________________________________8 1.1. Objectives____________________________________________________________________________8 1.2. The ENABLE project ________________________________________________________________8 1.3. Content and Structure of the report _______________________________________________9

2. Methodology _____________________________________________________________________________ 11 2.1. Overall approach __________________________________________________________________ 11 2.2. Criteria for projects and innovations selection _________________________________ 12 2.3. Key barriers and obstacles in Latin America____________________________________ 12 2.4. Key application areas for EU‐LA research and business cooperation_________ 18 2.5. Innovations clustering and description _________________________________________ 19 2.5.1. Thematic areas _________________________________________________________________ 19 2.5.2. Template for description ______________________________________________________ 19

3. Outlook on European freight transport research _____________________________________ 21 3.1. Brief overview of key research efforts and achievements in freight ITS______ 21 3.1.1. The outlook of the last 15 years – Key “Technological drivers” developed 21 3.1.2. Freight operations _____________________________________________________________ 23 3.1.3. Advanced fleet management __________________________________________________ 23 3.1.4. Messaging, interoperability, and standardisation developments __________ 24

3.2. ERA_________________________________________________________________________________ 25 3.3. ERANET Transport (ENT) ________________________________________________________ 26 3.4. Technology Platforms and Research organizations ____________________________ 27 3.4.1. Introduction ____________________________________________________________________ 27 3.4.2. ERTRAC _________________________________________________________________________ 28 3.4.3. ACARE___________________________________________________________________________ 28 3.4.4. ERRAC___________________________________________________________________________ 29 3.4.5. WATERBORNE _________________________________________________________________ 29 3.4.6. EIRAC ___________________________________________________________________________ 30 3.4.7. ECTRI____________________________________________________________________________ 31

4. European Freight Transport Innovations _____________________________________________ 32 4.1. Long door‐to‐door transport chains_____________________________________________ 32 4.1.1. D2D______________________________________________________________________________ 32 4.1.2. SMART‐CM______________________________________________________________________ 38 4.1.3. e‐Freight ________________________________________________________________________ 48

4.2. Intelligent technologies___________________________________________________________ 55

Deliverable D2.2:



4.2.1. EURIDICE _______________________________________________________________________ 55 4.2.2. GIFTS ____________________________________________________________________________ 60 4.2.3. Parcelcall________________________________________________________________________ 65 4.2.4. M‐trade__________________________________________________________________________ 70

4.3. Standardization ___________________________________________________________________ 75 4.3.1. FREIGHTWISE __________________________________________________________________ 75

4.4. Logistics____________________________________________________________________________ 84 4.4.1. KOMODA________________________________________________________________________ 84 4.4.2. BestLog__________________________________________________________________________ 91 4.4.3. BE LOGIC________________________________________________________________________ 95

4.5. Dangerous Goods_________________________________________________________________100 4.5.1. GOOD ROUTE __________________________________________________________________100

4.6. Container management__________________________________________________________110 4.6.1. CHINOS_________________________________________________________________________110 4.6.2. VIT ‐ Metrocargo ______________________________________________________________113 4.6.3. COSMA _________________________________________________________________________117

4.7. Border crossing operations management______________________________________123 4.7.1. INTERFACE ____________________________________________________________________123

5. Analysis _________________________________________________________________________________129 5.1. Introduction ______________________________________________________________________129 5.2. Description of research projects and further analysis ________________________129 5.3. Holistic approach to addressing the key barriers and thresholds of the target areas 142

6. Concluding remarks ____________________________________________________________________148 Bibliography__________________________________________________________________________________150

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Key barriers and obstacles in Brazil and Argentina ______________________________ 14 Table 2: The IT elements towards e‐logistics_______________________________________________ 89 Table 3: General aspects of research innovations to be applied in LA___________________129 Table 4: Identified research projects and their provisional transferability approach__131 Table 5: Holistic approach to addressing the key barriers and thresholds of Argentina and Brazil through deliverables D2.1 and D2.2____________________________________________143

Deliverable D2.2:



LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Innovations identification and presentation process ___________________________ 11 Figure 2: Representation of all stakeholders and public bodies in ERTRAC _____________ 28 Figure 3: Structure of the Waterborne TP __________________________________________________ 30 Figure 4: ECTRI membership ________________________________________________________________ 31 Figure 5: SMART‐SC Advisory Board ________________________________________________________ 41 Figure 6: e‐Freight innovations area ________________________________________________________ 51 Figure 7: EURIDICE Architecture ____________________________________________________________ 57 Figure 8: GIFTS freight transport operation services ______________________________________ 62 Figure 9: GIFTS platform architecture ______________________________________________________ 63 Figure 10: The Parcelcall Architecture ______________________________________________________ 68 Figure 11: A graphical overview of demonstrative elements _____________________________ 72 Figure 12: The Freightwise Framework ____________________________________________________ 77 Figure 13: The FWF process viewpoint _____________________________________________________ 78 Figure 14: The KOMODA architecture of e‐Logistics system ______________________________ 86 Figure 15: Principle of bestLog platform____________________________________________________ 93 Figure 16: BE LOGIC Strategy ________________________________________________________________ 97 Figure 17: GOOD ROUTE system architecture_____________________________________________103 Figure 18: Principal CHINOS components _________________________________________________111 Figure 19: COSMA system functions________________________________________________________118

Deliverable D2.2:



1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Objectives The deliverable D2.2 “Freight Transport Innovations List” of the ENABLE project aims at the identification of the European best practices that can be transferred to the Latin American region in order to facilitate the improvement and competitiveness of the intermodal freight transport in the target countries. Taking into account the significant progress made in Europe in the field of freight transport research and innovation, the particular goal of this deliverable is to outline the most significant European innovations and emerging ideas in this field and contribute to the promotion of research in Latin America (LA). An additional, but of equal importance, objective is to facilitate the cooperation between the two areas in the scientific topic of intermodal freight transport.

Due to the nature of research in Europe, the deliverable D2.2 has a clear technological character. The research innovations presented in this document entail technological advances in various areas of freight transport, such as port management, standardization, dangerous goods, cargo management, logistics, and others.

D2.2 can be considered as supplementary to the ENABLE deliverable D2.1 “Best Practices Handbook”. D2.1 is mainly oriented towards industrial and business European best practices, while D2.2 towards research. Both reports comprise a concise picture of European best practices, which can also be used beyond the scope of the present project.

1.2. The ENABLE project The primary aim of the ENABLE project is to contribute to the external relations of EU with Latin American countries, specifically Argentina and Brazil, in the area of co‐modal and intermodal freight transport. This falls in the general policy of the EC to strengthen its external relations with other areas. The gains anticipated by such actions are multiple and for the mutual benefit of both sides. These refer to competitiveness, knowledge transfer, environmental gains, increased trade relations and many others. The global dimension of freight transport and the increasing cargo flows between Europe and other continents demonstrate that co‐modal and intermodal freight transport is an excellent field to make these external relations stronger.

In line with the above, the goal of the ENABLE project is to stimulate sustainable freight transport systems with Latin American countries placing particular emphasis on co‐modality and intermodality. In order to achieve this goal, the work plan of ENABLE entails inventories and surveys aiming to obtain a deep understanding of the situation of intermodal freight transport in Latin America. The state‐of‐the‐art reviews in Europe will allow the identification of strengths and innovations of the European freight transport industry and research, while concrete roadmaps will be defined facilitating their effective transfer to the target countries.

The EU‐LA transport corridors are within the scope of ENABLE too. The relevant European best practices that may contribute to the effective transportation of cargo in the EU‐LA corridors will be defined and promoted.

Special attention will be paid to networking and partnership building actions that will strengthen the dialogue between Europe and Latin America, as well as to fostering international cooperation between the two geographical areas. A stakeholders Forum

Deliverable D2.2:



has been established in Latin America to bring together all types of stakeholders of the local and regional freight transport systems. Furthermore, Forum sessions, conferences and other dissemination actions will contribute to the visibility of the project results and engage the stakeholders of both sides in a fruitful dialogue.

The concrete objectives that will be achieved within the project are:

To perform a sound review and analysis of the local and regional freight transport needs, weaknesses, barriers and priorities in the target countries (i.e. Argentina and Brazil).

To conduct a thorough state‐of‐the‐art review of the European technological solutions, research results, industrial innovations and best practices available in the area of comodality and intermodality in freight transport.

To map the identified needs and priorities in Argentina and Brazil against the European know‐how paving the way for the successful transfer of the latter to the target areas.

To develop a series of roadmaps including concrete actions and strategies that will facilitate the effective deployment of the European know‐how to Argentina and Brazil. Selected roadmaps will be validated through case studies in the two countries.

To establish a Forum of stakeholders in Latin America bringing together all types of stakeholders of the local and regional freight transport systems. The purpose of this Forum will be multiple: debate forum, roadmaps validation mechanism, networking and dissemination channel.

Finally, to perform a series of dissemination and promotion activities including Forum sessions, conferences and Internet site.

1.3. Content and Structure of the report In addition to the present introductory chapter, the report is organized in four chapters:

Chapter 2 provides the methodology applied for the identification and presentation of the European innovations and emerging ideas including also a summary of the research priorities in Latin America, which were the driving factors for the selection of the European innovations.

Chapter 3 contains an overview of the research in Europe. It covers key research efforts and achievements in freight ITS, as well as major organizations conducting research in Europe.

Chapter 4 is the core part of the report providing the identified research projects clustered in thematic areas. Each project is described in two parts: a fact box with an overview of the project and a more detailed description of its aims, results, impacts, technology elements. The relevance of each project to ENABLE is highlighted as well as references for further information.

Chapter 5 provides a summary of all research projects presented in previous chapter 4, their thematic and specific goals and key results, along with key issues regarding their transferability in the target areas.

Deliverable D2.2:



Finally, Chapter 6 concludes the report providing some discussion and concluding remarks about the work done and presented in D2.2.

Deliverable D2.2:



2. METHODOLOGY 2.1. Overall approach The starting point for the identification of the European research innovations was the results of the previous technical activity of the project, i.e. the review and analysis of the intermodal freight transport system in the target countries (Argentina and Brazil). This activity provided not only the needs, problems, barriers and priorities of the local freight transport system, but also the research priorities. These research priorities were the main driver (criteria) for the work carried out and presented in this report.

Significant input was also provided by the various events that took place in Brazil and Argentina. Especially the first conference of ENABLE, held in Rio de Janeiro on November 18th 2010, resulted to as series of specific and concrete application areas, in which EU‐LA business, industrial and research cooperation can be promoted.

More detailed information about the research priorities in Latin America are provided in Sections 2.3 and 2.4.

Having the above information as a base, the ENABLE partners reviewed the European research results most relevant to the research priorities in Latin America. These results are the main European research innovations and emerging ideas, which have been derived by European research stakeholders as a response to existing needs and barriers of the continent’s intermodal freight transport sector. Furthermore, an outlook of the freight ITS research efforts and achievements has been performed and presented, along with the most significant research organizations performing research in Europe in the field of freight transport.

The selected European research innovations and emerging ideas are then described using a specific template defined for this purpose (see Section 2.5.2). These innovations along with the best practices presented in the ENABLE deliverable D2.1 will be transformed into roadmaps for smooth transferability and deployment to the target countries meeting the prime objective of the project.

In addition to the roadmaps, the research innovations will be widely disseminated to the target area through the Forum of Latin American stakeholders and the two conferences. Furthermore, the project’s information material (e.g. newsletters), the website, publications and other awareness actions to be performed locally by the responsible partners will facilitate the wide dissemination of the European research results.

The above approach is depicted in the following figure.

Figure 1: Innovations identification and presentation process

Deliverable D2.2:



2.2. Criteria for projects and innovations selection Within the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th EC Framework Programmes several research projects relating to intermodal freight transport have been implemented; dealing to intermodal equipment, infrastructure, telematics applications, services, operations, organization and standardization.

Projects in the 4th Framework Programme include among others: APRICOT, EMOLITE, IDIOMA, IMPREND, IMPULSE, INFOLOG, INTRARTIP, IPSI, IQ, IRIS, ITESIC, LOGIQ, PRECISE‐IT, PROMOTIQ, QMI, STEMM, TACTICS, UTI‐NORM and X‐MODALL.

Projects in the 5th Framework Programme include: CESAR, D2D, EUTP II, INFREDAT, IN.HO.TRA, INTEGRATION, IP, ITIP, INTERMODA, RECORD‐IT, SPIN and THEMIS.

Projects in the 6th Framework Programme include: BRAVO, CHINOS, FREIGHTWISE, INTERMODE‐TRANS, PROMIT and TRIMOTRANS.

Projects in the 7th Framework Programme include: SMART‐CM, INTEGRITY, KOMODA and EURIDICE. For more information about 7th Framework Programme, please visit http://cordis.europa.eu/home_en.html.

As mentioned above, the criteria used for the selection of the European research and development projects (R&D), innovations and emerging ideas derive from the:

1. Key barriers and obstacles for intermodal freight transport in LA as derived from the analysis of the existing situation.

2. Conclusions and recommendations drawn from the events that took place in LA:

- Workshop in Buenos Aires on 12th of April 2010.

- Workshop in Rio de Janeiro on 31st of May 2010.

- Conference in Rio de Janeiro on 18th of November 2010.

An overview of these barriers, conclusions and recommendations is presented in the following Sections 2.3 and 2.4.

2.3. Key barriers and obstacles in Latin America ENABLE conducted a thorough research and analysis of the transportation systems in Brazil and Argentina in order to identify and further examine the barriers, needs and priorities of the local intermodal transport systems. This analysis was enriched with two workshops performed in the target countries with participants’ local stakeholders. The workshops derived additional aspects of the transport systems, which require immediate attention.

All this work concluded to a thorough list of key barriers and obstacles of the intermodal transport systems in Brazil and Argentina that should be addressed in the near future. The list has been extracted from the ENABLE deliverable D1.1, which depicts the current situation analysis in LA and it is well justified. This list is provided in the following table. These barriers and obstacles will be examined in this document as primary research priorities in the target area. The research priorities can be tackled directly by the LA research programs or through the close cooperation with the European Union or even

Deliverable D2.2:



better through the cooperation with the European and LA industry. The latter is the scope of the ENABLE deliverable D2.1, while the present one will address the EU‐LA cooperation at research level.

Therefore and in with the above, the aim of this report is to identify and present the European research and development innovation that will tackle the research priorities that are based on the LA barriers and obstacles presented in

Deliverable D2.2:



Table 1. Some of the barriers and obstacles are out of the scope of the project (highlighted in grey cells).

Deliverable D2.2:



Table 1: Key barriers and obstacles in Brazil and Argentina

TRANSPORTATION

SYSTEM

TYPE OF BARRIER

BRAZIL ARGENTINA

Air transport

Infrastructure Problems with size of runway airport

that hinder direct cargo flights to other continents, forcing the use of Airport of Viracopos.

Limited articulation between the domestic and international air transport markets due to the two‐airport system in Buenos Aires.

Brazil as a hub port in Latin America for transit cargo.

Small amount of exports with a profile compatible with the use of air transport.

Transportation provision for air cargo is limited, since most of the cargo is transported by passenger aircrafts.

Higher costs of maritime transport (2005‐07) have coincided with apex of air sector crisis. Currently, much lower costs of maritime transport are a strong disincentive.

Operational

Provision of air cargo at most airports is less than demand, causing the load in most cases be transported by road to an airport that concentrates cargo flights to and from abroad.

Number of flights offered in the domestic market is still (March 2010) below the level of 1998, when touristic destinations are excluded. Ai

r transport

Institutional

and

Regulatory Additional charge for storage and

warfare charges on import. Rapid and subsequent changes in the domestic air market over the last decade. Operators have appeared and disappeared from the market, including changes in ownership that have blocked the consolidation on the cargo market.

Infrastructure General road conditions are precarious. Capacity problems in metropolitan

highways leading to the ports of Rosario and Buenos Aires. Expansion of capacity around Rosario is urgent, as well as expansion of parking and waiting facilities for trucks.

Operational Lack of supervision of the limit loads

carried by vehicles, which hinder the road structure and reduce the competitiveness of companies within the limits.

Need for enforcement of load restrictions on roads. Lack of compliance affects the economics of maintenance and reduce the competitiveness of truck operators complying. Ro

ad transport

Institutional

and

Regulatory Excessive bureaucracy in international

transport. Excessive bureaucracy in international transport. Not infrequently, border control of driver´s migratory papers may delay cargo already cleared.

Deliverable D2.2:



Transposition of rail freight through the São Paulo city could be facilitated by the “ring rail” in São Paulo state. Need of warehousing areas and parking coordinated with port operation.

Inherited infrastructure built 80‐100 years ago. Coverage is good (density of demand in the south of the country isn’t likely to justify additions). Bringing new branches into service should be carefully assessed to avoid compromising current density of use.

Interface with urban areas, where problems, such as intersections with city streets and occupied the tracks of the field, persist and thereby reduce the efficiency of the system.

Rail transport

Infrastructure

Bi‐oceanic rail corridor needs to be promoted.

Rail access to terminals in greater Rosario needs urgent expansion and adaptation. This issue is key for greater use of the entire railroad network. Railway access to Buenos Aires is clogged by the operation of metropolitan passenger services.

Guidelines for railway expansion in the Midwest. Rail access to the port of Sepetiba.

Rail access to the new container port in La Plata, equally inherited, should receive attention.

Rail network which has different sizes of gauges of the neighboring countries and some national meshes well.

Infrastructure

Format of tracks, that are ancient, have curves and ramps which require speed reduction.

Rail links from Argentina to northern Chile, Eastern Bolivia and Paraguay, in fair and good condition, but underutilized. Rail connection to Brazil dependent on transfer at rail yard at Uruguayana given the different gauges. International rail operations are not usual for rail operators and employees. Inefficiencies in border controls may favor fear to reach this latent cargo market.

Intensify use rail to stimulate the rail and road integration.

Operational

Low use of rail for freight between Brazil and Argentina.

One issue that should receive more attention is the possibility to develop a management system to allow for shared infrastructure use of different cargo operators. One port operator has shown interest in expanding to rail operations. Large mining companies could as well consider becoming operators if legal framework is available.

Rail transport

Institutional

and

Regulatory Existing concessions, due to the types of

contracts agreed, in general, limit the role of the concessionaires to maintain the infrastructure, impeding their enlargement of activities.

Extension of the current franchise schemes, or transition into a new model with greater emphasis on long term investments to adapt and renew inherited infrastructure.

Construction of logistics terminals for connecting waterways to the highways and railroads. Need for construction of locks to improve inland transport.

Need for strengthening the former river ports that where important in the past, especially on the upper section of Paraná river.

Need of enlargement of spans and / or reinforcement of the bridges pillars.

Waterborne (Ports and

Inland Waterways)

Infrastructure

Access by road and rail networks to ports and inland terminals.

Dimension problems of channels. Some stretches of Paraguay river should be adapted to reduce sharp curves and increase safety.

Deliverable D2.2:



Shipping is not competitive enough with the road system.

Operational

Need to improve inland sections of inland waterways with existing operation and with potential to operate.

Reliability and visibility of waterways would require tracking systems for cargo status and position. This is a relevant problem in River Plate´s (Paraná, Paraguay+Upper Paraguay) basin given the extended transit times currently treaded by cargo. Potential bulk cargo from Bolivia, Paraguay and Brazil subject to event highertransit times.

Delays in issuing environmental licenses hinder the navigation potential of waterways. Tax levied at ports in the reloading of goods transported by waterways; it is not imposed on the goods transported by rail and road.

Institutional and

Regulatory

Rules for hiring of manpower in the public ports that generates excessive labor costs.

Intermittent reluctance of Mercosur members to facilitate navigation of the upper section of Paraguay river. Potential market for bulk transport on waterways is likely to be significantly larger but linked to international traffic rather than domestic.

Problems in land access are critical to port operations.

Problems in road access and highways links in metropolitan areas of Rosario and Buenos Aires. Congestion, overlapping with local traffic, entrances to terminals in some cases still. Numerous Buffer yards for trucks have been built but the problems remains. IT to coordinate origin‐destination timing may apply.

Problems in access routes, such as maintenance and deepening of channels and berths.

Berths of container ports around Buenos Aires cannot yet fully accommodate 7100‐TEU ships already operating. Lack of storage containers.

Infrastructure

Studies for economic and environmental feasibility of new port areas.

Problems in access routes.

Much of the operation in stuffing and stripping of containers is in port, which hinders the operation modes, facilitated by the unitization of cargo.

Weak coordination procedures for receiving and delivery of container terminals in exports. Potential for technology applied to customs controls and procedures.

Need of feeder service of the loads with Argentina.

Legal definition of containers as transport equipment, although recently improved, still confusing.

Little use of inland ports due to difficulties in connection with other modes of transport.

Waterborne (Ports and Maritime Long Course and Cabotage)

Operational

Encourage the waterway transport through the Paraguay River to Argentina.

Difficult to accommodate the new vessels spokesman containers.

Deliverable D2.2:



Lack of clear definition of the model of private participation in port terminals in both the public ports and outside the port area.

Road congestion around main ports (greater Rosario and Buenos Aires).

Existence of legal restrictions on cabotage by foreign vessels.

Lack of leasing areas and facilities.

Necessity of review and update development and zoning plans. Strategy deployment of new ports; no guideline that limits competition and complementarity between existing ports and new ports.

Issue of port security concern to operators of port terminals, especially in relation to additional costs and their impact on competitiveness.

Institutional and Regulatory

Problems of communication and information flow at ports.

Lack of points of primary and secondary storage nodes.

Infrastructure

Necessity of support structure of intermodal terminals in the “road ring” of São Paulo State.

Size’s restriction of the parking lot of the Cristo Redentor border.

Incipient congestion at border posts.

Operational Lack of adequate operational safety.

Incipient development of logistics zones.

Non standard systems and documents. Opening hours at border posts insufficient or inadequate to the needs. Lack of harmonization of control services and support provided by organizations involved in the operations of customs control.

Warehousing and border crossing


Minor use of the International Cargo Manifest / Customs Transit Declaration International.

Deliverable D2.2:



2.4. Key application areas for EULA research and business cooperation

The events that took place in Brazil and Argentina so far (two workshops held respectively in Buenos Aires and Rio de Janeiro, and one conference in Rio de Janeiro) promoted a bilateral communication corridor: on one hand, a number of European innovations and best practices were discussed and further explained and on the other, the dialogue between the participants provided valuable recommendations and conclusions about fields of particular interest and priority for the LA countries, in which research innovations could be identified and applied. Some of these fields have already been identified as key obstacles and needs in the target areas and consolidated in the above Table 1, while others are presented below:

• Port development and management. The area includes:

- Port Community Systems.

- Systems for connecting port operations and shipping operations to logistics networks by utilizing advanced information technology (ITS).

- Encouragement and promotion of PPPs (public‐private partnerships) in port operation and infrastructure development,

- “Paperless port” concept and e‐freight applications.

- Stimulation of intra‐ and inter‐port competition.

- Tracking technologies and know‐how for containers and other unit load management.

- Shipbuilding.

- Modernization of labour regulation.

• Short sea Shipping and Coastal Shipping. This is an area with great potentials in serving intra‐regional transport flows and balancing the O‐D matrix, hence easing up the burden on land networks. Important remarks were made from the participants during the events about the need to promote coastal shipping services in Brazil and Argentina.

• Railway development and management. The issues concerning the improvement of railway services deal with: investments in coordination of the various railway lines and companies, traffic harmonization and settling some economic and financial issues particularly regarding the types of concessions given to private operators.

• Regulatory issues. The area includes the application of new regulation for intermodal transport operation in Brazil that will recognise the importance of the intermodal transport based on railways.

• New logistics concept and services as well as new business models more suitable for intermodal logistics networks. Design of logistics chain utilizing intermodal transport corridors arises as a key tool for the management of the supply chain.

• Planning for the development of new transport infrastructures and, above all, new transport international links and connections of a radial form (i.e. concentrating flows to hub) between LA countries and their markets in the rest of the world.

• Dangerous goods handling systems and tools. The area includes systems for the monitoring and routing of dangerous goods.

Deliverable D2.2:



• Real time information systems for managing and controlling the total door‐to‐door transport chain.

• Securing “green” lanes including systems for rebalancing of the O‐D matrix.

2.5. Innovations clustering and description 2.5.1. Thematic areas

In order to facilitate the understanding and use of the European research innovations a thematic clustering has been applied. Sixteen innovations have been identified and clustered into the following thematic areas:

• Long doortodoor transport chains: this area addresses research results that aim to facilitate the intercontinental freight transport flows using advanced technologies. This is an important thematic area, since the respective results may contribute to the cargo movements between Europe and Latin America.

• Intelligent technologies: this area entails emerging technologies for cargo inspection and control.

• Standardization: this area includes research efforts that address a crucial domain of freight transport: standardization and harmonization. Some of the most important promising potential future standards are presented.

• ELogistics: this area is dedicated to the logistics sector and more specifically to the optimization of the logistics chains through co‐modality.

• Dangerous goods: this area includes systems for dangerous goods vehicle routing, monitoring, enforcement and driver support.

• Container management: the area entails IT tools and smart equipment for container handling in intermodal nodes.

• Border crossing operations management: this area addresses the intermodal terminals and entails measures for the improvement of the efficiency and effectiveness of border crossing operations.

Each of the above thematic areas includes one or more European research innovations. These innovations have a strong technological character, since research in Europe is significantly influenced by technological advancements.

2.5.2. Template for description

The following template has been used for the description of each European research innovation.

A. Fact box (expressed in tabular format)

• Title

• Programme

• Implementation date

Deliverable D2.2:



• Type of product/result

• Motivation/background

• Key innovations

• Main stakeholders involved (including partnership)

B. Description

1. Project details

• Aims

• Results

• Information Technology elements

• Main benefits

• Strengths and weaknesses

• Examples of applications (pilots)

2. Relevance to ENABLE

• Address to target areas’ needs and barriers

3. Further reading

• References

• Contact info

Deliverable D2.2:



3. OUTLOOK ON EUROPEAN FREIGHT TRANSPORT RESEARCH

3.1. Brief overview of key research efforts and achievements in freight ITS

3.1.1. The outlook of the last 15 years – Key “Technological drivers” developed

The core of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) applications in freight transport and logistics in the 90s (during the 4th and 5th Framework Programmes) as well as the years 2000 (6th and 7th Framework Programmes) consisted of systems for obtaining, processing, and distributing information for better use in planning, operation, and management of the freight transportation system, as well as for developing appropriate infrastructures and services.

By the early 2000s the research focused more towards the creation of integrated web based applications able to be shared by many actors, over the internet.

Original freight Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) research produced mainly stand‐alone applications that can largely be classified in the following two broad areas:

1. Commercial Operations, i.e. applications mainly related to the vehicle, the cargo, or the company (operator), and related in their great majority to systems for the better monitoring of the transport (e.g. collection and sending of tracking and tracing data or route choice information, etc).

2. Fleet Management Systems, i.e. dedicated to the fleet management operations of a particular operator (or group of operators), including transport planning.

Although different in scope, both categories of systems required the development of a number of enabling technologies that are largely thought to be the key “technological drivers” for the Freight ITS developments of the future. Some of these are now already firmly established in the market while others are still emerging.

Most of the 1990’s technologies enabled, therefore, the later more sophisticated activities and system‐wide applications as well as the various e‐business activities of the firms that form the core of the Freight ITS applications of today. They also prepared the ground for more wireless, more internet based, and more integrated systems that emerged in this decade and which already point towards the future comprehensive and fully integrated total transport and supply chain management systems of the European Freight ITS.

Most of the technological drivers in the freight sector were developed in the nineties and early 2000s, and were the subject of the original Freight ITS research work in the corresponding periods. It is worth mentioning here the core of these “technological drivers”:

• Mobile transmission technologies such as GSM, allowing transmission of messages (voice and data) between home‐base and vehicles.

• GPS (Global Positioning System) technology enabling, for example, Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) and Computer‐Aided Dispatch (CAD) applications.

Deliverable D2.2:



• Availability of more affordable positioning information via these GPS or GSM transmission networks.

• 'Mobile Internet' made available via wireless broadband communications, for document exchange and access to ICT services (e.g. the navigation services for Personal Digital Assistants ‐ PDAs).

• The XML (eXtensible Markup Language) standard, offering a meta‐language for the definition of simple and non‐proprietary data exchange standards.

• The various route guidance and navigation systems (i.e. packages of algorithms, electronic networks, and software to combine these to useful information assisting the driver in all sorts of ways). The most advanced such systems of today are based on the enabling technologies developed in the nineties and early 2000 and go beyond “canned” information to suggest to the driver “alternative actions”, such as for example routes based on actual traffic information.

• Onboard sensors performing a variety of functions such as: tracking the vehicle’s mechanical condition, monitoring speed, or the state of the loaded goods (e.g. temperature), automatic payment for toll roads, etc.

• Systems and hardware for vehicle or load unit identification. The most notable achievement in this field is the RF‐ID card (transponder) used as electronic seal or otherwise at terminals, load transfer points, gates of various sorts, etc.

• Smart cards enabling new applications such as the electronic tachograph, electronic driver licence, or the storage of load‐related information.

The end result and system wide implications of the research and development effort in the last 15 years are now beginning to emerge. They are certainly the basis of new systems and services that are transforming the (European freight transport) industry. Their combination into globally available systems, or their spin‐offs that are currently being slowly introduced into the market, are certain to form the backbone of the future European Freight ITS in terms of:

Availability of integrated information and services, based on the improved availability of internet standards and infrastructure, for offering web interfaces for tracking and tracing, geographical information and navigation systems, or transport related data exchanges via XML standards.

New “Intermediary systems” offering services such as freight matching, transport auctions, rate quotes or other more specialised functions (for example, the multicarrier internet portal INTTRA for the shipping industry, or transport exchanges for road transport and air cargo). Transport exchanges are third party services offering value‐added services to transport providers such as “load matching” services to optimise vehicle utilisation, tracking and tracing, etc. These are not new, as ideas, but their full scale application and trustworthiness are only recently taking a boost due to the previously mentioned “enabling technologies” and their maturing.

Integrated onboard computer systems and home‐base systems that are interconnected via data links based on GSM/WAP or mobile internet, and offering to the home‐base new types of information and data, allowing applications such as emergency rerouting and timely customer/shipper information in the case of delays, or better estimated times of arrival that enable more precise and more efficient resource allocation (e.g. a truck may no longer have to wait long periods at a port because a shipment is delayed).

Deliverable D2.2:



New and innovative fleet management and monitoring capabilities that include in some cases information from floating car data. For example, large companies are now beginning to equip their fleet with sensors transmitting vehicle location to the management centre and allowing new levels of real‐time information gathering, flexibility, and responsiveness.

3.1.2. Freight operations

The Freight Operations area of ITS can be defined as “Advanced ICT systems aimed at simplifying and automating freight operations at both the operational efficiency level as well as the institutional level”. The goal is to enhance the efficiency of commercial vehicle activities through seamless operations based on electronic vehicle and cargo identification, location and tracking, pre‐clearance and in‐motion verifications.

These systems relied heavily on vehicle or cargo positioning systems (GPS or radio frequency network), bidirectional communications (DSRC, radio, satellite, or wireless phone), and EDI. In the US initial deployment efforts of CVO (Commercial Vehicles Operations) technologies have been organized around so‐called “corridors”. Weight‐in‐motion scales, overweight detectors, EDI, automatic vehicle (and cargo) identification and classification systems, vision technology (to read license plates), and variable message signs to mention the main technologies used.

In the framework of freight terminals, EDI, GPS, Automatic Identification Systems and similar technologies are heavily tested and developed with significant impact on the performance of transportation systems as a whole and particularly intermodal transportation, and logistic chains. Significant progress has been made in the last decade in introducing automation and advanced information and decision technologies to freight terminals, port container terminals in particular.

In Europe, systems were developed that integrate the basic and enabling technologies (see section above) into data “platforms” for presenting information to both the vehicle and the control center at the office, or even at the roadside. Gradually (starting in the early 2000) all these systems and information combined into internet based “platforms", allow a commercial vehicle to share urgent information with nearby vehicles, and to dialogue with its control center, or with infrastructure operators and service providers. A most notable finding of the research work of the 90s (and of most applications and their Demos) was that there has to be a critical mass of users of ICT applications, i.e. users willing to pay in the market, before a new ICT application can take route and be “attractive” enough, i.e. financially justifiable, to generate more “mass” application. Also, investing in these new systems may only be profitable when these technologies are fully integrated with other systems within the organization.

3.1.3. Advanced fleet management

Most developments so far in the area of Fleet Management (and a significant part of contemplated future applications) address operational issues, load matching and resource allocation, dispatching, and routing, in particular. The principal goal of these systems is to offer the possibility to control and co‐ordinate fleet management operations in real time via internet based applications.

In a typical large or medium‐sized freight operator, fleet management is a complex task that includes actions and activities that may be known well in advance or that are sometimes repetitive (e.g., vehicles making regular deliveries to food and detail shops),

Deliverable D2.2:



or that may operate in a demand‐responsive mode, with the demands for services not always known beforehand, and the fleet has to be deployed and managed (re‐routed) in real‐time to handle them as effectively as possible.

The focus of Fleet Management projects was to produce systems that enable communications between dispatchers in control centers and vehicle operators in the field, and also to ensure timely and correct data delivery to the planning and monitoring systems of the firm. The continuous improvement and integration of Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and communication technologies resulted in the improvement of the quality and the reduction of the prices of fleet management systems. This meant wider acceptance of these technologies and their utilization in many modal and inter‐modal settings.

The advent of the internet revolution in the late nineties brought new heights in ICT applications in this area all of which gradually became internet (web) based. Further to these, the trend is towards the use of ICT and the appropriate planning and operating management methods and instruments, to support virtual business‐to‐business communities of interest.

3.1.4. Messaging, interoperability, and standardisation developments

Since messaging and data transfer is an integral part of any transport chain, achieving widespread systems interoperability and standardisation has been, and still is, a very important precondition and “enabling” factor for future Freight ITS development. Some segments of the transport industry, especially the SMEs in the road transport, have traditionally been very slow to introduce modern ICT based systems. This is due to the fact that as pointed out before the attainment of tangible benefits requires a “critical mass” of actors using interoperable ICT systems is a necessary precondition for reaping the benefits of these technologies and thus, so far, SMEs have failed to fully benefit from better ICT integration and innovation.

“Messaging” in the B2B context, has until the mid nineties been largely associated with the advent and development of the UN/EDIFACT (EDI for Administration, Commerce & Transport) standard, which began to be largely used in the mid 80s. The UN/EDIFACT was the only recognised multi‐sectorial international standard for message exchange and has been used extensively in Western Europe as a fast and reliable means of achieving electronic, computer‐to‐computer message exchange between trading partners based on standard messages. Although it is faster, more efficient and more accurate than paper documents, there were several concerns associated with it in the past. For example, EDI based electronic documents raised authentication, integrity and confidentiality concerns. The use of digital signatures and digital certificates in fulfilling authentication and identification functions is expected to make electronic documents as legally binding and enforceable as paper documents, while encryption can address confidentiality concerns. The above, together with the inherent complexity and special effort required in “creating” appropriate EDI messages led to the gradual reduction in EDI applications in favour of more simplified and internet based messaging technologies, namely the XML (eXtensible Markup Language).

The use of the Internet for trade facilitation became the catalyst that led to the replacement of EDI in the medium term. An important facilitating role was played by the rapid rise of the XML standard as a means to encode semantic structures pertinent to a domain in a form, which is both machine‐readable (well formed) and human‐readable (marked up with meaningful tags). XML has become today the most important data

Deliverable D2.2:



interchange format for e‐business. An XML document can be displayed by software (for example, by a standard Internet browser), but it can also be processed by domain‐specific applications in the same way as EDIFACT messages. There are now conversion tools such as the XML‐Edifact, which offer an open path for migration between XML and UN/EDIFACT, turning the complex EDIFACT messages into a human‐readable format.

XML has become the basis for the definition of new protocols for platform‐neutral interoperability such as the widely supported SOAP (Simple Object Access Protocol) that allows remote procedure calls between applications in a distributed environment. Another originally competing standard, the ebXML, that grew out of UN/CEFACT and OASIS (Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards) and also supports more complex aspects such as digital signatures and norepudiation, will integrate SOAP into its Messaging Services Specification. It enables enterprises to conduct business over the Internet in more straightforward and efficient ways than in the past. The ebXML has been standardized and it is currently known also as ISO 15000.The XML technology seems to be cheaper and more flexible and is generally present in most software applications. Its wide availability and ease of use will allow the wider transport related community to communicate with each other – particularly those for whom EDI type applications are beyond reach.

The proliferation of XML‐based business interchanges has served as the catalyst for defining a new global paradigm that is currently on the rise, i.e. that all business activities, regardless of size, could engage in “e‐business” activities.

3.2. ERA The EC’s European Research Area is composed of all research and development activities, programmes and policies in Europe which involve a transnational perspective. Together, they enable researchers, research institutions and businesses to increasingly circulate, compete and co‐operate across borders. The aim is to give them access to a Europe‐wide open space for knowledge and technologies in which transnational synergies and complementarities are fully exploited.

ERA consists of activities, programmes and policies which are designed and operated at all levels: regional, national and European.

There are a number of fully integrated European‐level structures and programmes: the EU RTD Framework Programmes, including the current Seventh Framework Programme (2007‐2013), related European agencies and undertakings, as well as a number of intergovernmental infrastructures and research organisations. Some have existed for more than 50 years, such as the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN) and the research activities of the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom).

For more information about ERA, you may visit: http://ec.europa.eu/research/era/index_en.htm.

Deliverable D2.2:



3.3. ERANET Transport (ENT) ERANET Transport (ENT) was launched in January 2004 in the first phase of networks of ERA (European Research Area) that was financed by the E.U. under the 6th Framework Programme. The main objective of ENT is to facilitate the collaboration and the co‐ordination of national researching programs and actions in the transport sector between the EU member states in order to keep pace with their national objectives and to benefit from the administrators side of national programs.

ENT has applied a top‐down approach for the collaboration between the administrators of national programs at the level of programs ‐ common programs and expressions of interest ‐ but also at a wider level concerning specific collaborations in the context of projects. The ultimate goal of ENT is the achievement of collaboration of national researching programs in the transport sector.

In its first steps, ENT promoted the transnational collaboration on issues of transport research between nine (9) at that moment European countries: Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Great Britain, Netherlands and Finland. The members of the network were increased twice: once in 2005 with the integration of Denmark and Poland, and then in 2007 with Spain and Switzerland.

The main achievements from the first phase of ENT are the following:

• Research studies at trans‐European level have initiated and significant experience has been gained from 16 actions of co‐ordination and collaboration. Four out of the 16 actions achieved cost‐effective collaborations in the form of bilateral and common declarations.

• Mechanisms of trans‐European collaborations have been developed and checked.

• Analyses of national research programs have been performed leading to the definition of objectives of collaboration.

• Co‐ordination of national researching programs in the transport sector.

• In some member states of the EU, the new research programs in transport support clearly specify the trans‐European collaboration and ENT.

• Because of the support that ENT provides, new national transport research programs have been developed in Poland and Denmark.

• An essential networking of many national institutions of the European research community has been achieved, resulted to the dissemination of the results and the interaction between them.

• The number of the member states of the European Commission had increased from 9 to 13, because of the to date achievements but also because of the future benefits which will possibly occur.

ENT had brought in contact the Ministries of Transport and the Ministries of Research and Science between 13 European countries to intensify their engagement for an active collaboration in research. The collaboration represents research programs in transport of approx. 300 Mio Euro p.a. Through the first phase of ENT (ENT I), a clean picture of possibilities and barriers of this collaboration has been derived. These experiences will facilitate the accelaration of collaborations in the future.

The aims of the second phase of ENT (ENT II) are the following:

Deliverable D2.2:



• The increase of the activities as well as the level of collaboration between the members.

• The continuation and the intensification of the collaboration and the co‐ordination of national research programs.

• The development of more and more extensive collaborations between national programs, as it is forecasted in the plans of ENT Plus or in the article 169.

• Modernisation of the ways and the mechanisms of ENT support.

• An active contribution to the rationalization of the European Research Area through networking with European and international institutions.

• Further increase of the number of the European countries that participate to the ENT.

3.4. Technology Platforms and Research organizations 3.4.1. Introduction

There are many European organizations performing innovative research and development. Some of the most important and well known are presented in this section.

The European Technology Platforms focus on strategic issues where achieving Europe’s future growth, competitiveness and sustainability depends upon major technological advances. They bring together stakeholders, led by industry, to define medium to long‐term research and technological development objectives and lay down markers for achieving them. The achievement of these objectives will significantly improve the daily lives of the European citizen in many areas.

Technology platforms play a key role in better aligning EU research priorities to industry’s needs. They cover the whole economic value chain, ensuring that knowledge generated through research is transformed into technologies and processes, and ultimately into marketable products and services.

In the transport sector, technology platforms have been developed for all four transport modes, one per mode:

ERTRAC, for road transport

ACARE, for air transport and aeronautics

ERRAC, for rail transport

WATERBORNE, for waterborne transport

A short presentation of each technology platform is presented below.

Another purely research entity is the European Conference of Transport Research Institutes (ECTRI). ECTRI is composed of 27 leading European transport research centers. ECTRI is also briefly presented below.

Deliverable D2.2:



3.4.2. ERTRAC

ERTRAC, the European Road Transport Research Advisory Council, represents the diverse range of road transport stakeholders and brings them together with representatives from public authorities at the European, national, regional and urban levels.

The multi‐stakeholder nature of ERTRAC makes it unique in being able to present an holistic and integrated view of road transport issues. ERTRAC’s mission is to seize the opportunity for better coordination of private and public research activities, and to make specific recommendations for their implementation. ERTRAC delivers roadmaps for crosscutting research that provide a reference for the future planning of European and national transport programmes. In addition, it is hoped that this reference provides an overarching framework for research, innovation and technological development, as well as guidance for individual research planning.

Figure 2: Representation of all stakeholders and public bodies in ERTRAC

For more information about ERTRAC, you may visit: http://www.ertrac.org/.

3.4.3. ACARE

Launched at the Paris Airshow in June 2001, ACARE (Advisory Council for Aeronautics in Europe) comprises about 40 members with a clearly defined and commonly agreed terms of reference, including representation from the Member States, the Commission and stakeholders, including manufacturing industry, airlines, airports, service providers, regulators, the research establishments and academia.

ACARE's main focus is to establish and carry forward a Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) that will influence all European stakeholders in the planning of research programmes, particularly national and EU programmes, in line with the Vision 2020 and the goals it identifies. To this end ACARE's activities are likely to include:

• Launch and approve the SRA and update it periodically;

Deliverable D2.2:



• Make strategic and operational recommendations as well as commission studies for implementing the SRA and achieving the 2020 Vision;

• Evaluate the overall results and benefits of the SRA for Member States, the Commission and stakeholders groups;

• Recommend measures for optimising the use of existing research infrastructures and achieving cost‐effective investments;

• Recommend measures for improving educational policies to attract the scientists, engineers and other skills that the sector needs;

• Develop and implement a communications strategy to promote awareness of the SRA (within the stakeholders’ community as well as to larger public audiences) and to disseminate information on stakeholders' research programmes for facilitating consensus on priorities.

For more information about ACARE, you may visit: http://www.acare4europe.com/.

3.4.4. ERRAC

ERRAC (European Rail Research Advisory Council) was set up in 2001 with the ambitious goal of creating a single European body with both the competence and capability to help revitalise the European rail sector and make it more competitive, by fostering increased innovation and guiding research efforts at European level. Within ERRAC, all major rail stakeholders are gathered. ERRAC comprises of 45 representatives from each of the major European rail research stakeholders: manufacturers, operators, infrastructure managers, the European Commission, EU Member States, academics and users’ groups. ERRAC covers all forms of rail transport: from conventional, high speed and freight applications to urban and regional services.

Since its start in 2001, ERRAC has produced a number of important and influential documents, such as the Joint Strategy for European rail Research – Vision 2020, the SRRA – Strategic Rail Research Agenda and its 2007 updated version, Suburban and Regional Railways Landscape in Europe, Light Rail and Metro Systems in Europe, Rail Research in Europe, a comparison of the Member States public research programmes with the ERRAC SRRA and others that you can find on this web site as well.

For more information about ERRAC, you may visit: http://www.errac.org/.

3.4.5. WATERBORNE

WATERBORNE is an initiative that came forth from the Maritime Industries Forum (MIF) and its R&D committee in 2005 and is making strident efforts to regularly update R&D requirements for European competitiveness, innovation and the meeting of regulations like safety and environment. The stakeholders include EU associations covering deep and short sea shipping, inland waterways, yards, equipment manufacturers, marine leisure industry, research and university institutions, classification societies etc. The so‐called stakeholder Support Group is matched by a Mirror Group of government appointed delegates.

The structure of the Waterborne Technology Platform is shown in the following figure. In this figure the various thematic topics are presented (Shipping, Infrastructure, Shipbuilding, etc.) and the organizations cooperating with the Platform in each topic (for

Deliverable D2.2:



example: European Ship Ports Association (ESPO), Inland Navigation Europe (INA), Community of European Shipyards’ Associations (CESA), etc.).

Figure 3: Structure of the Waterborne TP

For more information about WATERBORNE, please visit: http://www.waterborne‐tp.org/.

3.4.6. EIRAC

EIRAC is the European Intermodal Research Advisory Council. It has been set up to guide public and private investments on current Research Framework Programme in the European Union, and in Member or Accession States. Since 2005, it has developed a joint research strategy through a new and common vision for innovation and change, which consequently turned into a Strategic Intermodal Research Agenda for year 2020, and to Implementation Plan.

In 2020, according to the research agenda, intermodal transport is seen to be the natural choice for the movement of goods in Europe. By 2020, the European intermodal transport system, featuring also Multimodal and Combined Transport, is envisaged as accounting for 40% of the movement of goods, as the transport of freight, even bulk, will become increasingly unitized. Intermodal transport will be an industry with its own identity, its own strategy, and its own voice.

For more information about EIRAC, please visit: http://www.eirac.eu/.

Deliverable D2.2:



3.4.7. ECTRI

ECTRI (European Conference of Transport Research Institutes) was established in 2003 as a non‐profit association with the objective to promote integrated surface transport research and development in Europe. ECTRI’s mission is to provide the scientifically based competence, knowledge, and advice necessary to move towards its vision, which is “an efficient, integral European transport system that provides completely safe, secure and sustainable mobility for people and goods”. To this purpose, ECTRI:

• endeavours to provide practically applicable answers to questions of policy formulation;

• brings together the foremost, policy relevant, interdisciplinary scientific competence available in Europe, capable of carrying out state‐of‐the‐art primary and applied research in transport;

• strives to continually improve the quality and overall efficiency of European transport research;

• continually looks for innovative solutions to the present and future challenges in the field of transport;

• endeavours to provide European transport research institutes with the conditions necessary for the development, maintenance and exploitation of their scientific excellence.

Figure 4: ECTRI membership

For more information about ECTRI, please visit: http://www.ectri.org/.

Deliverable D2.2:



4. EUROPEAN FREIGHT TRANSPORT INNOVATIONS 4.1. Long doortodoor transport chains 4.1.1. D2D

A. FACT BOX

Title Demonstration of an integrated management and communication system for door‐to‐door (D2D) intermodal freight transport operations

Programme 5th RTD Framework Programme, GROWTH ‐ KA2 ‐ Sustainable Mobility and Intermodality

Implementation date 03/2002 ‐ 03/2005

Type of product/ result

Logistics management and communication system is developed to efficiently organise and manage intermodal door‐to‐door transport chains. Such system supports and automates business transactions and information exchange between the different actors in the transport chains. The main results D2D aimed to produce were:

(a) A generic business model for transport chain management.

(b) An open data model covering all aspects of intermodal transport.

(c) A technical solution for a commercial Freight Transport Monitoring Services.

(d) A technical solution for a commercial Transport Chain Management System.

(e) Samples of “smart” transport equipment and software illustrating the potential for smart technologies to improve the competitiveness of intermodal transport.

Motivation/ background

D2D project is a response to Task: 2.3.1/13 in the 3rd Call for proposals of "Promoting Competitive and Sustainable Growth", Key Action: Sustainable Mobility and Intermodality. The market for logistics management systems is developing rapidly. Globalization, lead‐time reduction, customer orientation and outsourcing are some major changes contributing to the focus and interest into logistics management. Integration of the supply chain has become an important way for the industry to gain competitive advantages. As a result, the role of logistics providers is changing both with respect to contents and complexity. New firms from different fields are entering the market competing with the traditional transport and warehousing companies. Assessing the market for logistics IT systems is a major challenge, since the terminology and descriptions of the functionality of the applications have not yet reached global standardization.

Key innovations Development of an integrated D2D Software Solution Prototype, combining the Freight Transport Monitoring System, the Transport Chain Management System and the D2D Communication Platform

Main stakeholders involved

The main stakeholders involved in D2D are users from the transportation industry and especially users of waterborne transport in door‐to‐door transport chains:

• John Deere

• Volkswagen

Deliverable D2.2:



• Elkem

• Pamesa

• Nutasa

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

D2D demonstrated how to build and use (in a number of real cases) integrated management and communication systems for door‐to‐door intermodal transport chains. These chains were also enhanced with "smart" technologies and equipment for further improvements. The aim was to show solutions that could be used by any operator (shipper/forwarder) responsible for an intermodal chain or parts of it, without having to make major changes to relevant information systems already in use. Open architecture and standardised interfaces were used to promote interoperability with legacy systems and with commercial information providers. The goal was to provide a tool for managing intermodal transport chains on a European as well as on a global level and to design a supporting tracking and tracing system, which could be commercially exploited in different settings.

The aim of the D2D project was to analyse five multimodal transport chains, assess the activities required for efficient chain management and then assess existing technology and develop new systems that could support these activities. Thereafter to develop a generic business model for transport chain management that incorporates the functionalities of such technology. The final objective was to demonstrate how to use such processes and systems in the five transport chains.

• Results

The project has demonstrated how to accomplish efficient transport chain management with the assistance of advanced information and communication technology, and it has provided examples of new elements in the Intelligent Transport System. The main results of the project comprised a transport chain management system available as a web based Internet application, a monitoring system, an efficient implementation of a system integration tool (communication platform), simulation and service profiling technology and tracking and tracing technology. Another important element was the methodology that was developed which shows how to implement such systems efficiently in five transport chains, based on the developed generic business model for transport chain management. The results after completion of the project were:

− Documentation of five demonstrator business models, including a description of current to that time business processes, with respect to roles, actors, responsibilities, activities, decision points, transport documents, information systems and flows.

− Development of a generic business model describing the role and responsibilities of a Transport Chain Manager in a door‐to‐door transport. The model also included a description of how the new D2D systems are used in order to support the Transport Chain Manager.

Deliverable D2.2:



− Development of re‐engineered demonstrator business models describing how the future business processes may be organised and performed. The re‐engineered models included the new role termed the Transport Chain Manager and a description of how the new D2D systems may be used in order to support management of the chain.

− Development of a state‐of‐the‐art report for freight monitoring. The report included an up‐to‐date review of the most well known technologies and systems in use for tracking and tracing (T&T) at that time in intermodal freight transport, as well as an assessment of various applications for such T&T systems in the D2D demonstrators.

− Development of a state‐of‐the‐art report for door‐to‐door transport chain management. The report included an analysis of the state of the art in TCMS and ERP systems, definition of functionality and interaction techniques existing at that time.

− Specification of TRIM (Transport Reference Information Model – a data model) in Together Soft, including automatic generation of database entities.

− Establishment of user requirements to Tracking and Tracing information (based on WP1 results) and design of Freight Transport Monitoring System (FTMS) functionality.

− Development of a FTMS software solution with core tracking and tracing modules and a visibility and status user interface.

− An organisation to operate the FTMS under real life condition has been designed. Special focus has been put on making it generic and adaptable to any user‐defined transport chain.

− Development of FTMS documentation that can serve as a promotion tool and guide new FTMS users from the transportation industry.

− Functional requirements for a Transport Chain Management System (TCMS).

− Development of a fully operational TCMS software solution with enhanced functionality according to feedback from the actors in the demonstrator chains (hierarchical load units, dynamic transport chains, etc.).

− Development of user documentation required for the efficient use of the web based TCMS.

− Development of the D2D Communication Platform based on a software solution already developed by TRD International. This platform handled the communication between TCMS/FTMS and the outside world.

− Development of XML messages based on EDIFACT required for communication with actors in the demonstrator chains (additional development still required for some chains).

− Development of an integrated D2D Software Solution Prototype, combining the FTMS, the TCMS and the D2D Communication Platform.

− Demonstrated D2D software in all five transport chains, which showed that there are real benefits both in the efficient use of information and the operational accuracy and effectiveness.

Deliverable D2.2:



− A service profiling program SPPG has been developed for statistical evaluation of the quality and reliability of transport services by comparing planning and operational data.

− D2D completed a development plan for IPSI related technology for physical handling and initialized an evaluation of possible application of this technology in the D2D chains.

− An analysis has been made of the points where the D2D chains could be improved in the area of monitoring and chain visibility with “smart technology”.

− A detailed analysis has been made for the application of smart monitoring technology to the Elkem chain.

− D2D tested satellite tracking and/or GSM bar code scanner feeding position data into a D2D visibility solution developed by CLS in the John Deere and Elkem chains.

− D2D showed that it is possible to use a simulation software tool like Arena to simulate the progress of transport in the John Deere chain.


Available smart technologies were used within the D2D project. Smart technologies are a mix of wireless telecommunication and computing technology to facilitate the information flow. The following groups of technologies were identified:

− Black‐box type: No human intervention required

− Database access type: Allows a person to remotely update a database. Some examples are tags like RF‐ID or passive tags which can be used for identification.

− Satellite tracking:

GEO satellite (Inmarsat C, D+, Vistar, Spacechecker) or LEO.

Satellite (Orbcomm) which provides tarcking and monitoring services.

Smart phones: connected PDAs or smart phones that fill in a form and upload it.

Tablet PCs: several ruggedized tablet PCs with GPRS available for access to a database.

A small software component was also developed that allows to scan the barcode on the tractor, choose the status info between “Loaded”, “Unloaded” and “Problem” and send this information via SMS.

Overall, smart technologies were not part of the core of the D2D project; however it was an add‐on depending heavily on the willingness of the partners and chain actors to deploy new technologies: more could have been done, should time have permitted.

Finally, a review, analysis and assessment of the most advanced T&T solutions implemented in the freight transport world was performed in order to identify alternatives that will lead to the formulation of a relevant framework to guide the system architecture work for a novel Freight Transport Monitoring System (FTMS) . Tracking and Tracing (T&T) systems, services and products available in the market at that time included: short‐range identification technologies (e.g. barcodes, RF tags, ISM,

Deliverable D2.2:



DECT), position determination systems (e.g. GNSS, GSM, PMR), position reporting systems (e.g. GSM, Satellite; PMR) and telemetry Reporting Systems.

• Main benefits

Demonstrated D2D software in all five transport chains showed that there are real benefits both in the efficient use of information and the operational accuracy and effectiveness.

Generally, it is the opinion of the project management that even with some setbacks related to some lack of support from actors in the chain, the project partners have developed new and innovative concepts and solutions that will definitely have long term benefits for improved control of multi modal transport chains. The methodology used in this project was also developed substantially over the 36 months of the project and will no doubt be used by the project partners in their future work.

The demonstration of the D2D Solution indicated the following business benefits:

− One central co‐ordination point provides better control.

− More streamlined workflow (less redundancy).

− Positive impact on costs.

− Positive impact on lead time.

− Positive impact on reliability.

− Positive impact on delivery precision.

− Positive impact on transparency.

− Positive impact on flexibility.

− Positive impact on quality management.


The demonstrations were carried out through a number of challenging tasks and requirements; practical installations, interfacing and linking relevant internal systems of each of the participating organisations, implementation of the D2D software and provision of specialised equipment along the transport chain. Further, in the D2D project the ability to organise team work and handle cultural differences in a competent development environment shoved to be very essential. For each demonstrator a detailed transport scenario was developed describing the events taking place. The D2D system was implemented as an Internet application in the five demonstrators. The technical and functional focus was different in each of the demonstrations according to available resources and industrial commitments. The most extensive demonstrations were performed in the John Deere and Volkswagen chains, while the most real life demonstration, with the use of web interface, took place in the Portuguese chain.

The systems and technologies used per demonstrator are:

− John Deere chain / FTMS, TCMS, Communication platform, Automatic and manual.

− Simulation with Arena, Service profiling, Satellite tracking of barge.

− VW Volkswagen chain / TCMS, FTMS, Communication platform.

Deliverable D2.2:



− Nutasa (Portugal) chain / TCMS, all actors involved, operationally testing.

− PAMESA / TCMS, limited shadow demonstration.

− ENL (Elkem) TCMS, FTMS, Satellite Tracking of vessel using Inmarsat C.

2. Relevance to ENABLE – Address to target areas’ needs and barriers

D2D project resulted in a fully operational Transport Chain Management System (TCMS) and a Freight Transport Monitoring System (FTMS) with functional requirements and user documentation for the successful adaptation of both of them to any user‐defined transport chain. The stakeholders involved in a given door‐to‐door transport chain could benefit from the resultant efficient use of information and the effective and accurate operation of their cargo in terms of:

• Better control of the cargo flow and the freight unit itself through one central co‐ordination point and positive impact on reliability. Smart technologies added on D2D project, as well as the review, analysis and assessment of the most advanced T&T solutions implemented in freight transport, could address the identified barriers in Brazil and Argentina through: i) the facilitation of information and communication flows at ports and the ii) reliability and visibility of the waterways through the tracking systems for cargo status and position.

• Positive impact on transport chain management. D2D, after assessing current business processes, resulted in business models with respect to roles, actors, responsibilities, activities, decision points and more and with the assistance of advanced information and communication technology. The solutions addressing the LA barriers regard:

- Management solution(s) that will allow use of different cargo operators for shared infrastructure.

- Business models that could be adopted from shipper actors in order to balance the high demand in road transport with qualitative services in waterborne transport, thus encouraging the competitiveness of shipping services.

- Action plans for the better handling of the cargo throughout the whole transport chain, which could have positive impacts on delay times, costs, flexibility and transparency, in a macro‐scale, and on warehousing operations, custom control services and stuffing & stripping/receiving & delivering of containers in port terminals, in a micro‐scale.

3. Further reading

• References

− www.d2d.no/d2d

− http://www.transport‐research.info/web/projects/project_details.cfm?id=4614&backlink=/web/common/search.cfm&referer=currentpage*2|ispostback*true|contenttypes*Projects|pagesize*50|tools*23

Deliverable D2.2:



− http://www.ist‐world.org/ProjectDetails.aspx?ProjectId=8aabf2e84c5d4c8ea77e213f0efd7d8f

• Contact info

Mr Olav Espeland

Wallenius Wilhelmsen Line AS

Strandvegen 20 ‐ 33

1324, Lysaker

Norway

Email: [email protected]

Tel: +47 67 58 46 75

Fax: +47 67 58 41 44

Website: www.d2d.no/d2d

4.1.2. SMARTCM

A. FACT BOX

Title SMART‐Container Chain Management

Programme 7th Framework Programme

Implementation date 01/08/2008‐31/07/2011


SMART‐CM concept is to develop, test & demonstrate “single window” interoperability architecture for container supply chain management. The development, demonstration and the after project duration, operation of the “SMART_CM platform” is the major “technological component” of the project balanced concept for achieving efficient & secure door‐to‐door container chain management in the future.


Container transport is by definition “Intermodal”. In the majority of cases it is characterised by long distances, use of multiple modes, various actors’ involvement and multiple levels of logistics operations, whose management varies from “macro” decisions regarding the main haulage planning and monitoring, to “micro” management decisions for the day to day operations until the container reaches its final destination. Optimising such types of chains in order to achieve seamless, efficient and safe door‐to‐door transport of containers invokes the need for MACRO, MESO & MICRO management tools, specific information, and data for all stages and activities of the process and requires interfaces between different types of actors, transport infrastructures and technologies.

Although considerable advances have been made in the last few years in all the above levels the fact remains that all stakeholders in the container supply chain are still faced with several challenges and unsolved problems which can be grouped under the following four headings:

Innovation / Technology: How to best improve (especially with regard to

Deliverable D2.2:



cost and power supply duration) existing technologies for containers’ identification and monitoring, create “technology neutral” platforms for data integration and “intelligent” sorting, and test alternative ways for communicating the necessary data to the various “actors” along the chain.

1. Commercial / market related: Understand better how the market for container transport is structured, how it is developing and what are its principal characteristics and influencing factors, and cope in a more integrated way with the pre‐ or after‐transport activities of order handling, processing, payment, etc.

2. Legal / Security: How to deal with the various legal (including liability) issues and the security rules and regulations, especially in the face of the change of responsibilities between the actors in the various stages of the chain.

3. Business / organisational: How to best exploit the efficiency offered by the technologies used and the data and information acquired, with lean and more efficient business and organisational structures all along the sector.

Key innovations The key innovation of the project for its entire lifecycle, as well as the expected results to be achieved, is depicted in the following bullets.

In fulfilling its overall and detailed objectives, the proposed project will produce a number of specific results and “products” beyond the current state of the art, which can be described as follows:

1. A global “Service Oriented” Architecture for seamless door‐to‐door container transport, incorporating new technological concepts and tools for container monitoring and data transmission and analysis.

2. Innovative hardware and software tools compatible with the above “Architecture”, but also valuable as “stand alone tools”, that will (among others) include: a) improved container data capture and transmission equipment, that can work with different “data capture” technologies power supplies – and monitoring possibilities; b) innovative ways / algorithms for handling the incoming data “intelligently” (according to the needs and requirements of the “users”) and making them available to the specific “actors” involved at the specific levels and stages of the chain; c) a central shared information system of vessel and container (and in some cases cargo) monitoring data; d) systems with specific data and information “focussed” on the needs of “special actors” in the chain, namely security authorities and the customs; e) new algorithms for the “dynamic” scheduling of containers in order to achieve specific efficiency and environmental objectives.

3. Proposals for increasing interoperability of existing systems and data bases and extending or completing existing global standards for container transport in line with the legal / security / customs requirements of the current, or foreseen in the immediate future, European and US security legislation.

4. Proposals (based on feasibility and impact analysis studies) for new business as well as management and operational structures in the door‐to‐door transport of containers, that are fully compliant to the new technological “tools” and allow wider commercial / market penetration of SMEs (Small and Medium Sized enterprises) in the

Deliverable D2.2:



container transport business.

5. Proposals and systems that will include specifications for new e‐documentation and intermodal business transactions in the commercial container transport supply chains of the future.

6. Recommendations for the “economic” as well as “operational” threshold values for the unit cost of container monitoring equipment and data communication systems, together with guidelines concerning the number of containers to be equipped as well as the selection process for equipping these containers with monitoring and data communication equipment.

7. Recommendations concerning the liability issues connected to the damage and / or interruption of the chain, including innovative proposals that will reduce the number and cost of checks at the various stages of the journey and a calculation of the costs to the insurance industry of non‐checking. In relation to this, recommendations of innovative ways of covering the potential increase in insurance premiums in cases of non‐checking.

8. Proposals of novel ways of combining the new legal / security / customs requirements of the current or foreseen in the immediate future European and US legislation for container transport, with the need to reduce delays and speed up procedures at customs and security check points. Concepts such as the “miles and bonus” principle in container checks will be studied in detail and evaluated under different “environments” especially in less advanced (technologically) ports such as in the South Eastern European and South Eastern Asian countries.

9. Formulation and testing of a Decision Support Tool for “automating” intermodal container transport management decisions based on basic business and operating rules, and making it easier to manage supply chains from less developed logistics centres.

10. Training and human resource management recommendations, including: proposals for easy to implement and cost effective processes for training the personnel involved in the planning, as well as the monitoring and controlling operations; training materials including texts and training software based on multimedia technologies; a detailed methodology for determining training samples; indicative number of training hours and training curricula.


Worlds' largest terminal operators, Logistic Service providers, Shipping companies, Technology providers and national customs organisations are cooperating within SMART‐CM aiming at using state‐of‐art technology for making improved security for container transport beneficial for business and logistics while responding to the challenges of the future. The fields and roles required by a solid partnership that would cover the need emerging for such a project are the following:

• Logistics, Intermodal freight forwarders and Carriers as the user and practitioners of global supply chains.

• Terminals Operators and port authorities as the nodal points in the global chains and critical for achieving seamless intermodal transport.

• Technology providers for the provision, design, development and implementation of the technological components, vis‐à‐vis

Deliverable D2.2:



communication, monitoring and control of global chains.

• Logistics, Intermodal freight transport Research for coordinating, designing, implementing, evaluating and validating the SMART‐CM approach.

• Authorities/International Associations including regulatory bodies, standardization bodies and decision makers that influence the global supply chains framework and operational environment.

• Given these general roles needed to be integrated in the partnership the following figure provides the allocation of the partners in these categories.

Figure 5: SMARTSC Advisory Board

In addition to the well experience members of the consortium, an external validation and consultation body was considered necessary in order to expand the impact of the project and have direct links to the global chain community. This body has been established commonly with the INTEGRITY project and is the “Joint Advisory Board (JAB).

The role of the JAB is to provide added expertise and independent opinions for the proper and timely execution of the work‐plan of the two projects and advise on practical implementation/dissemination issues for the projects’ “products”. Participation in the JAB means full knowledge of the project’s main rationale and plan of work, and commitment to participate in all events planned by the Board and to deliver expert opinions and advice as requested.

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

The specific S&T objectives of the Project will be to:

Deliverable D2.2:



1. Develop, test, and validate the single window interoperability architecture for container supply chain management (SMART‐CM platform) based on the principles of a Service Oriented Architecture – SOA, that will incorporate and offer: innovative technological concepts including hardware and software for container monitoring and supply chain management that go beyond the current state‐of‐the‐art; common definitions and solutions for the interoperable and seamless data exchange between all the parties in the intermodal container chain irrespective of the technologies they are using for data capture; algorithms for the optimisation of decision making, scheduling and dynamic re‐scheduling along the container supply chains of the future.

2. Propose improvements and / or extensions to existing global standards for container transport (including the suite of standard business messages that can be used for the exchange of information) with the aim of increasing interoperability of systems and data bases, complying with global operational requirements, and promoting the suggested SOA at global base for applications in the container transport industry in order to maximise the impact of new systems and technologies in the future.

3. Create functionalities that are required to support the implementation of secure trade lanes, based on real corridors, meeting real requirements by customs and logistics actors, and to deliver a real solution afterwards that is accepted and ready for use. These functionalities constitute the SMART‐CM platform neutral mechanism which, in order to be acceptable, effective and sustainable, the project assumes three specific key components to be demonstrated: a neutral operational layer development, a neutral implementation and a neutral organization to run it.

4. Investigate the commercial / market environment in which container transport is performed today (primarily through the specific cases of the 2 Demonstrators ‐ 2 corridors used in this project).

5. Define new management and operational structures for door‐to‐door transport of containers that are fully compliant to the current and foreseen new technological “tools”. These will be the result of an analysis of the impacts that the new technologies would have on the organisational, operational, and business aspects of the industry.

6. Investigate new business concepts that are adapted to the above “new” management and operational structures, and formulate and test mechanisms for “automating” intermodal container transport management decisions (based on basic business rules).

7. Demonstrate, validate, and evaluate the technological innovations to be proposed and, to a certain feasible degree, the organisational and business ones, under real life conditions in the framework of 2 major Demonstrators:

Corridor A: Demonstrator EU‐Middle East Corridor from Antwerp to Port Said, feeding service to Thessaloniki‐Dubai‐NAVA SHEVA/Mundra.

Corridor B ‐ EU‐Asia/Pacific Corridor: Antwerp‐Singapore‐Feeder service to Laem Chabang‐Ningbo in China.

• Results

Deliverable D2.2:



The goal of the first 18 months of the project was to develop the core functionalities of the platform and make proof of three main project concepts:

− “Interoperable Single Window platform solution” enabling all logistics actors and customs authorities to monitor the container security status independently of the Container Security Device (CSD) technology applied in a trade lane. No bias towards specific CSD technology providers & No bias towards customs or businesses.

− “Neutral information administering organization” managing the platform, guaranteeing data integrity along the whole process of security related container info gathering and provisioning information from the platform to the stakeholders.

− “Industry Added Value creation” on the basis of the information the technology and the trusted environment of a neutral platform enable to be made available in order to create direct business benefit. Thus, the “burden” of the security regulation compliance may be transformed to an added value for the transport industry.


Project Technology development was made operationally available.

1. The interoperable Single Window Platform (Neutral layer of SMART‐CM platform abstract architecture) reached its 3rd software release and was made available to actors for validation in real world environment.

2. Container authorised opening service was specified, developed and tested by the customs.

3. Logistics visibility layer of the platform and 6 Added Value Services (AVS) was specified, developed & made available for validation through simulation by the industrial actors. They mainly deal with the monitor of the chain execution against initial plan and the provision of customised, by industrial actors, notifications & alerts on deviations. (Container ETA update/Container prior‐to‐arrival notification/Container delay alert generation/Container idle time alert at terminals/ Container geo‐fencing alerts on regions/ E‐mail notification alert handling for all VAS)

4. CSD technology functionality, sensors, power and communication infrastructure was enhanced and its 2nd release was tested in real world demonstrations. New generation devices are expected to be tested during the last phase of the project.

5. Two advanced AVS, stimulating the research dimension of the project were specified & confirmed regarding their feasibility for full operation in the future. They will reach the level of a prototype development and validation through simulation within the project life cycle. Entitled “Strategic routing scenario planning” & “Dynamic intermodal (re)routing of containers” they guarantee that the SMART_CM work efficiently takes into account the state of the art technological research performed in other projects and could act in the future as new technology/solutions enabler.

6. Platform information exchange interfaces with additional sources of information (such as Vessel trackers), customs, 3PL, shipping lines & terminal operators internal systems and other service platforms were studied in detail also

Deliverable D2.2:



considering current applied or proposed standards by competent organisations. First level specification of information exchange protocols was achieved and in some cases implemented. In the next project phase finalization of this activity is expected also in line with the CEN standardisation workshop the project will initiate.

• Main benefits

There have been several processes for identifying the benefits emerging from the SMART‐CM concept. During the surveys among the key stakeholders of the project the following are stated as possible benefits:

A. Supply Chain Performance perspective:

1. Cost Reduction

- Operational costs reduction. Operational costs within each organization, including: Inventory carrying cost, distribution cost, labor cost, administrative cost, asset operational cost.

- Investment costs reduction. Investment costs within each organization, including: Inventory cost, infrastructure setup cost.

2. Throughput time reduction

- Process time reduction. Processing time of each organization, including: conveyance time, loading/unloading time, selection and inspection time, etc. Faster, more stable and more predictable border crossing process such as more efficient customs clearance process.

- Waiting time reduction. Time for containers waiting for the next operation in certain point, such as dwell time.

- Lead time reduction. Time from the moment the supplier receives an order to the moment the buyer receives it in the absence of finished goods or intermediate inventory.

3. Productivity improvement

- Asset Utilization optimization. Optimize the physical asset management in order to maximize value, extend asset life and improve ROA, the indicators include capacity utilization and asset moves per hour, etc.

4. Reliability Improvement

- On time delivery. Increased percentage of on time deliveries to customers due to the higher quality information and visibility disclosure, thanks to better decision making during execution and planning.

5. More flexibility, more added value

- Quick response to customers. Quick response to customers’ demands and more flexibility, therefore better company image and credibility.

6. Quality monitoring

Deliverable D2.2:



- The container security devices (CSDs) can be equipped with various sensors that monitor container and cargo state. The monitoring information might be used for liability purposes.

B. Supply Chain Security perspective

7. Efficiency in legislation compliance

- Secure point of loading. The rate of the transportation of container meeting mission requirements to provide the required shipments to the critical transfer points within the supply chain.

- Required security procedure. The rate of the processing procedure of container meeting mission requirements to provide the required operation to the critical transfer points within the supply chain. Much better customs regulation & processes compliance.

8. Theft and smuggling prevention

- Theft and Interruption Prevention. The susceptibility to physical injury or attack and fraud as well, such as smuggling, theft, and tax and tariff fraud.

9. Supply chain resilience: quick and flexible response

- Agility of re‐planning. The ability of the network to provide and maintain service in the face of various faults and challenges to normal operation.

10. Risk management improvement and better customs risk profiles

- Auditable risk exposure. More reliable risk evaluation with deep insight into goods flow, advanced data sharing to establish risk management system.


The main strengths of the project for achieving its goals are:

− The extra emphasis placed on security and customs requirements.

− The extra emphasis placed on standardization and training work.

− The organisation of the work into a very transparent, explicit, and justified Work programme and management structure.

− The implementation of a solid and multifaceted programme of Demonstration.

− The proposition of a solid and clear Technological solution to test.

− The involvement of extra expertise and global “players” through the Advisory Board.

− The consideration of an integrated Global Approach through an integrated global Consortium.

Deliverable D2.2:



The main weaknesses that are encountered so far are related to the following:

− Several non‐European partners face specific difficulties in participating to technical meetings and workshops due to travelling restrictions.

− Political issues related to customs and transnational agreements impede the smooth implementation of the demonstrators requiring special permissions.

− Intensive technology concentration activities are required in order to align the work undertaken among the technological partners for the development components.

− Limited sources for assessment and quantification of benefits.


The Project solutions were demonstrated in real world environment:

− Two phase of demonstration activities were concluded in this period. The first for actors’ familiarisation to the basic project technology and early validation of basic platform functionalities. The second for proving the full operation of the Interoperability Single window platform.

− The project issued a call to external CSD providers who would like to test their technologies. From the companies expressed their interests two have been selected for participating in real global demonstration corridor. Together with the project partner EDC (Belgium ‐EU), the new comers RAYTHON (USA) & CIMC (China) completed a good representation of the CSD technology providers around the globe contributing to project solutions development.

− The demonstration corridors operated by the project partners DHL, K&N, COSCON involved major ports around the globe: Antwerp, Rotterdam, Singapore, Nigbo, Dubai, Nhava Sheva (India).

The results of the real world tests concluded already a concrete project outcome towards industry: “List of Key performance indicators of CSDs for security”. The CSD technology providers should fulfil minimum requirements in order to meet the customs and industry actors’ expectations for container security.


SMART‐CM proposes a service‐oriented Architecture for a seamless door‐to‐door container transport, incorporating new technological concepts and tools for container monitoring and data transmission and analysis. In combination with compatible hardware and software tools – also proposed –, the application of the aforementioned architecture in the case areas of Argentina and Brazil could optimize the information and communication container flow (especially at ports, where severe communicational problems occur), through innovative technological concepts for container monitoring, scheduling and data exchange.

SMART‐CM also proposes ways of combining legal customs requirements with reduced delays and faster procedures. Specifications for new e‐documentation are provided, along with solutions for an effective data exchange, leading to simplification of procedures and standardization of the systems and documents at border posts, as well as harmonization of control services and support provided in custom controls. The

Deliverable D2.2:



positive effects on time schedule cost and flexibility concerning the containers handling for avoiding congestions, is, thus, unquestionable.

In addition, new management and operational structures for door‐to‐door transport of containers are defined. New business concepts are investigated that could enrich the role of railway, maritime and inland waterway in an intermodal transport network and promote a modal shift from road to rail and waterborne.

Furthermore, improved container scheduling, resulting from SMART‐CM Architecture, can lead to reduction of time for containers waiting for the next operation, and, thus, reduce the demand of storage space. Optimization of the physical asset management can lead to minimization of capacity needs in warehouses and port terminals, flexibility in cases of deviations from the normal operation and, generally, better control of the cargo unit.

Finally, functionalities to support secure trade lanes are proposed. An “Interoperable Single Window platform solution” is proposed enabling all logistics actors the monitoring of the cargo’s security status. Container security devises increase the liability of the transport system by enhancing the operational safety in warehousing, border crossing and port terminals.

3. Further reading

• References

− http://www.smart‐cm.eu

• Contact info

Project Coordinator

Hellenic Institute of Transport / CERTH

Tel: +30 2310 498457

[email protected]

Technical Management

DHL Global Forwarding

Tel: +32(0)3 568 32 35

[email protected]

Quality Management

KUEHNE + NAGEL GmbH

Tel: +43 (1) 263 0900 7016

gernot.weise@kuehne‐nagel.com

Communication & Dissemination

Deliverable D2.2:



European Intermodal Association

Tel: +32.25145654

peter.wolters@eia‐ngo.com

4.1.3. eFreight

A. FACT BOX

Title European e‐Freight capabilities for Co‐modal transport

Programme EU's 7th Framework programme

Implementation date

01/01/2010 – 31/12/2013


E‐Freight platform for the design, development, deployment and maintenance of e‐Freight1 solutions in surface transport (including large and small businesses and authorities).


The continuously increase of freight volume within the borders of Europe leads to the need of improving the existing transport resources. The term of co‐modality, namely the efficient use of different modes on their own and in combination, along with advanced technology, begins to rise up within the EC transport policy, as a key solution to the problem. Such a strategy approach is depicted in the Freight Logistics Action Plan, launched by the European Commission (Communication from the Commission COM 2007/ The EU’s freight transport agenda: Boosting the efficiency, integration and sustainability of freight transport in Europe COM (2007) 606 final) with the main objective to promote competitive and environmental sustainable freight systems, reliable on co‐modality and advanced technology. Moving a step forward, and always within the vision of EC, the improvement of the information flow within the freight transport logistics is a key determinant for the improvement of the quality and sufficiency of the whole freight transport chain: stakeholders require ‘Information Highways’ for their co‐modal solutions, while transport managers ask for open networks and web based management systems for the dissemination of their services. The harmonization and optimization of the regulatory requirements across modes and EU States is also considered critical for seamless, minimum‐delayed processes within the freight transport chain.

e‐Freight Framework will be developed building on results from

1 According to the EU Freight Logistics Action Plan, the term “e‐freight” indicates the paperless freight transport processes where an electronic flow of information is linked to the physical flow of goods.

Deliverable D2.2:



the projects Freightwise and MarNIS, and will be used in the e‐Freight platform to support the development of the e‐Freight Solutions.

Key innovations E‐Freight establishes a platform for the collection, promotion and active dissemination of the e‐Freights solutions, developing co‐modal ΄Information Highways΄ with an emphasis on interoperability, beyond national initiatives, and advanced position and surveillance technologies. The innovative efforts towards this aim are depicted in the following pillars:

• Definition of a Single Transport Document (STD) regardless of the modes being used or the actors involved.

• Facilitation of the development of a next generation National Single Window, regarding safety, security and environmental risk management, integrated with the EU single windows and platforms.

• Interoperability Supports through strictly standardized information objects.

• Setting co‐modal transport networks through a “layered model” oriented to efficient and, mainly, sustainable transport services.

• Building a Transport Execution Plan (TEP) for co‐modal shipment planning, utilizing semantic technology tools and real time freight optimization platforms.

• Providing transport execution solutions utilizing the “Internet of Cargo” capabilities.


The involved stakeholders are:

• Transport users (shippers, freight forwarders, etc)

• Transport service providers

• Transport infrastructure providers

• Transport regulators and administrators

• Research organizations and universities

• ICT developers

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project detail

• Objectives

The project aims at contributing to the following e‐Freight goals communicated in the Freight transport Logistics Action Plan:

Deliverable D2.2:



- Formulation of a standard framework for freight information exchange covering all transport modes and all stakeholders.

- Development of a Single European Transport Document for all carriage of goods, irrespective of mode, and provision of legislative support. This will lead to zero needs for paper documents for planning, executing and completing any transport operation within EU in spite of parties involved, cargo type, transport mode or combination of modes, loading unit, authorities involved, type of service, transport corridor, liability regime.

- Establishment of a Single Window (single access point) and one stop shopping for administrative procedures in all modes.

- Establishment of simple, harmonised border crossings procedures for all modes of transport for all EU member states.

- Establishment of simple procedures and the necessary infrastructure for secure and efficient transport corridors between Europe, USA, and Asia.

• Results

The project’s main outputs are rested in the following pillars:

1. Internet‐based e‐Freight platform (ICT platform) which will enable local functionality and communication with business partners, authorities and EU platforms, and other user communities by delivering integrated software capabilities for building, customising, integrating, running and managing e‐Freight Solutions. The platform will be validated through business studies and pilots in representatives EU’s freight corridors. The analysis results of the case studies will, sequently, feed back the internet technologies implemented in the project, in terms of their scalability and dependability. The platform will provide a business‐ready semantically enabled service‐oriented infrastructure empowering the European freight transport sector in offering and using e‐freight services efficiently.

2. A2A and A2B solutions for co‐modal transport, which will entail guidelines and reference implementations for the EU Single Transport Document. Furthermore, Next Generation Single Windows will be developed for cargo and traffic monitoring with SafeSeaNet (SSN) and e‐Customs to support cooperation between administrations in security, safety and environmental risk management. These contribute to development of a European network of integrated transport chains, linking road, rail and waterborne resources in an optimum way, as well as simplification and harmonisation of regulatory requirements across modes and EU States.

3. B2B and B2A solutions for co‐modal transport management, which will entail guidelines and reference implementations for diverse levels of transport operations (strategic, tactical and operational). This includes the set up of liner service networks, shipment planning and monitoring of the transport services (through RFIDs data collection, KPIs computation, etc.).

4. Roadmap for the adoption of e‐Freight solutions.

Deliverable D2.2:



InteroperabilityInternet of cargo

Advanced Position and Surveillance Technologies

e-Freight Solutions(Information Highways for Co-modality)

B2B and B2A Solutions A2A and A2B Solutions

Interoperability supports for Administrations co-operating in security risk management Transport execution solutions

Single Transport Document

Next Generation National Single Windows for Co-modality Co-modal shipment planning

Setting co-modal transport networks

Figure 6: eFreight innovations area


The e‐Freight platform will consists of two main components: a) a model driven e‐business platform based on process/workflow standards (e.g. BPMN and BPEL), provided to all stakeholders and b) a Semantic Enabled SOA platform based on WSMX, which will support the interoperability of stakeholders. More specifically, the elements of the e‐Freight platform include:

1. E‐Freight workflow, simulation, analysis toolset.

2. E‐Freight Ontology.

3. E‐Freight Semantic Registry and Repository.

4. E‐Freight Semantically Enabled Service Oriented Architecture (SESA) platform.

• Main benefits

The project identifies the below areas of benefits:

1. The harmonization and simplification of regulatory processes. The aim is to improve information flow both in multi‐modal and multi‐actors interfaces, in line with the principles of co‐modality. E‐freight will cover exchanges between businesses and administrations and between administrations themselves by developing and implementing e‐documentation and e‐transactions.

2. Co‐modality. As mentioned above, the focus of e‐Freight will be on co‐modal freight transport. This responds to the need for the de‐congestion of existing

Deliverable D2.2:



transport systems and, hence, for more sustainable, cost‐free and effective transport services.

3. Chain management solutions that assist transport stakeholders in establishing common end‐to‐end transportation processes incorporating regulations compliance and ‘intelligent’ monitoring and control. Particular attention will be paid on integrating processes for managing optimised utilisation of the complete transport infrastructure and transport resources. By achieving these, the e‐freight will facilitate the efficient use of the different transport modes and co‐modal solutions, and improve stakeholders network management incl. planning and controlling shipments.

4. Interoperability in the field of security risk management. E‐freight project set out to create ‘flexible interoperability’, based on e‐freight ontologies and semantic technologies, which, along with standardized information objects, will enhance the security of freight transport networks.

5. Business competitiveness. E‐Freight solutions will create open freight transport e‐market places that enable transport users (i.e. shippers, freight forwarders) to find and use direct or combined transport services most suited for their need. The e‐Freight project will develop a registry of internet based e‐Freight services and means for their secure interconnection supporting an evolutionary approach to the development of e‐Freight market places and ,thus, increasing the competitiveness of European enterprises in freight transport logistics. This will result in reduced costs, access to new and larger markets, supply of broader services, etc.

• Strengths

- The e‐Freight mechanisms shall be technology independent,

- The e‐Freight mechanisms shall be based on existing systems and solutions.

- State‐of‐the‐art approach will be implemented, which employs the output of earlier projects (i.e. Freightwise).

• Examples of application (pilots)

The e‐Freight project will test six (6) B2B/B2A business cases in order to validate the e‐Freight results:

CASE 1: Application of advanced e‐Freight services in STENA LINE, Gothenburg, in cooperation with customers including SCHENKER and DSV. Shipment planning, co‐modal networks establishment, status reporting of the cargo, use of Single Transport Document and National Single Window, are some of the issues which will be addressed.

CASE 2: Transport between ARA (Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Antwerp) ports and Germany (freight integrator will be ACOS Group, Bremen). The business case will concentrate on containerized cargo, transported via rail, inland waterway barges and road. Standardized procedures for the information flow, as well as common integrated processes regarding planning, execution and completion will be in the scope of the business case.

CASE 3: Road Transport for Jan De Rijk Logistics business, concerning the improvement of the existing IT environment in data exchange.

Deliverable D2.2:



CASE 4: Transport between Lisbon and Spain/Portugal. The aim is to improve contract logistics, cross docking and internal warehouse operations and container depot, as well as designing an optimal co‐modal network between Lisbon and Valencia, through the use of the e‐Freight results and “Internet of things” technologies.

CASE 5: Co‐modal transport for the Ireland, Britain, Mainland Europe Corridor, with a special focus on ferry services to/from Britain and Mainland Europe. The aim is to optimize the co‐modal transport networks and test them through shipment planning solutions, as well as to develop Transport Execution Solution with the use of “Internet of things” technologies.

CASE 6: Deployment of Single Transport Document (STD) and Next Generation National Single Window in Latvia, coordinated by the Maritime Administration of Latvia (MAL) in cooperation with Latvian ports, the Latvian Shipping Company, customs, rail and road operators and environmental agencies.


The solutions of e‐Freight address the target areas’ needs and barriers both in an institutional/regulatory level and an operational level. The deployment of a Single Transport Document will standardize systems and documents at border crossings and simplify the custom procedures. That way it will speed up the border processes and, thus, manage the excessive bureaucracy in international transport, the congestion at border posts and the lack of harmonisation of customs’ control. In addition, and in close relation to the above, the establishment of a Next Generation National Single Window will provide the opportunity for a more efficient cargo monitoring and it will facilitate the information flow and coordination between administrators, in terms of security, safety and environmental risk management. The ‘Internet of Things’ technologies, also investigated in e‐Freight, can give an extra boost to cargo routing and monitoring. In live with the above, e‐Freight can effectively deal with issues of security in terminals, as well as problems in their communication and information flows.

Within a wider point of view, all the B2B and B2A solutions addressed in e‐Freight, could provide transport operators and policy makers with the necessary tools to carry forward an efficient, cost‐effective, sustainable and competitive co‐modal transport, ensuring a better balanced modal split between road transport modes, on the one hand, and rail and waterborne transport modes on the other hand.

2. Further reading

• References:

- http://www.efreightproject.eu/ - Public deliverables will be available at http://www.ebostechnologies.com/efreight/ when finished.

• Contact info

Ms. Mary Vayou

Deliverable D2.2:



BMT Group web : www.bmtgroup.com email : [email protected]

Deliverable D2.2:



4.2. Intelligent technologies 4.2.1. EURIDICE

A. FACT BOX

Title European Inter‐Disciplinary Research on Intelligent Cargo for Efficient, Safe and Environment‐friendly Logistics


Implementation date Start date 01/02/2008, Duration 36 months


Information services platform for freight transportation


The main motivations are the important challenges to the logistics industry sustainable growth. These challenges are:

• Extreme fragmentation. A highly fragmented traffic of goods and logistic operations is observed. The few big players are far from controlling the overall traffic, subcontracting most of low value activities, road transport in particular. In Europe, average 80% road haulage goes to micro‐companies of less than 10 employees.

• Labour intensive sector, with low margins. Logistics employs 2.6 million workers in EU, mostly in road freight transport3. The average value‐added per employee is of 33 k€ in EU.

• Commodity vs. value‐added services. Despite aggressive business plans and institutional support, advanced services like 3PL and intermodal transport have yet to take off. Supply Chain Management (SCM) process and value‐added data are still kept mostly in the customer hands, i.e., the “cargo owner” industry and distribution companies.

• Sustainability challenges. Trucks absorb 35% of total road fuel production with an expected increase to over 40% by 20305. Transport is considered responsible for 23% of global CO2 emissions. Shares by mode, 22% from freight trucks, 10% from water‐borne and 44% from light duty vehicles, show that freight contributes significantly to the overall figure.

• Regulatory pressures. Communities have to bear the high costs for infrastructures maintenance and update (e.g., trucks account for 50% of motorway traffic), while citizens suffer from impact on fuel prices, congestion in cities and road safety problems.

Key innovations The key innovations are:

• Enhanced and widespread capability to monitor, trace and safely handle moving goods at the required level of detail, from full shipments to individual packages or items.

• Increased efficiency of transportation networks, by improving synchronization between logistic users, operators and control authorities.

• Improved sustainability of logistic systems, by reducing their impact on local communities in terms of traffic congestion and pollution.



Deliverable D2.2:



• Operators, cargo owners, infrastructures and authorities.

• Industry and distribution leaders, logistics outsourcers (3PLs) and

• Environment‐sensitive companies, communities, control authorities.

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

The European Integrated Project EURIDICE aims at development and diffusion of the Intelligent Cargo, intended as a paradigmatic change in the field of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) applications for transport logistics. The EURIDICE project intends to fill the existing gap between technical feasibility and adoption of ICT services platforms for goods mobility, by coordinating scientific and technological research in two directions:

− Structured approach to technology innovation, harmonizing and filling gaps between existing technologies and aiming at the intelligent cargo as unifying concept. Individual technology developments and standardization initiatives aim at removing specific technical barriers to innovation, each representing just a portion, if important, of the whole problem of intelligent monitoring and management of moving goods. EURIDICE intends to integrate state‐of‐the‐art into a coherent platform based on the intelligent cargo vision.

− Holistic perspective on logistic processes and stakeholders, that considers both traditional and innovative business models, while looking explicitly at the cargo communities operating at the local and global levels. The goal is to build an information service platform addressing simultaneously the logistics, business and public policy aspects of freight transportation, currently supported by different unrelated services each conceived for a specific stakeholder and a specific area of interest.

• Results

EURIDICE goal is to build a services platform centred on the individual cargo item and on its interaction with the surrounding environment and the user, allowing cargo objects and devices to perform basic interactions on their own and to involve the users’ information systems if and when needed. The EURIDICE platform is open and scalable: users will have the option to use and extend the EURIDICE services gradually, depending on the involved stakeholders and the required level of functionality, from data acquisition to automated transactions, to intelligent data analysis and decisions support.


Radio‐Frequency Identification technologies (RFID), service oriented architectures (SOA), interoperability platforms for data interchange and collaboration between business partners, mobile and wireless technologies and global positioning systems are the main IT elements of EUREDICE.

Deliverable D2.2:



Communication services provide connection between users, vehicles and cargo as well as between the Intelligent Cargo and sensors like RFID antennas, GPS receivers, and other localization system, temperature, humidity or any other sensor types used within the EURIDICE.

Figure 7: EURIDICE Architecture

• Main benefits

EURIDICE produces significant benefits for the logistics industry and for the transportation community:

− Enhanced and widespread capability to monitor, trace and safely handle moving goods at the required level of detail, from full shipments to individual packages or items: a)Reduced delays and errors, b)Better exception management, c)Increased service level, d)Improved information support to end customers, carriers and field operators, and e) Faster ‐ more automated operations.

− Increased efficiency of freight transportation networks, by improving synchronization between cargo owners, logistic services and control authorities: a) Easier integration of supply chain partners, including small transport companies, b) End‐to‐end visibility of the flow of goods, c) Optimal management of supply chain resources, d) Clearly assigned responsibilities among supply chain partners, e) Increased possibilities to expand business globally and f) Improved capabilities for decision makers to handle global transport operations.

− Improved sustainability of logistic systems, by reducing their impact on local communities in terms of traffic congestion and pollution: a) Increased load factor

Deliverable D2.2:



in road freight transport, b) Favoured modal shift towards low‐impact transport modes, c) Reduced security threats across the supply chain and d) Improved customer relationships in (e.g., more accurate pricing) in turbulent business environments.


No information available.


Eight pilot scenarios have been selected to test the EURIDICE infrastructure and technologies on real cases, with the aim of demonstrating the Intelligent Cargo concept and its advantages. Each scenario refers to a precise business context and problem to be solved.

Scenario S1: Connected transport and production processes.

The scenario involves a manufacturing supply‐chain leader, its suppliers and related logistic operators. The objective is to increase synchronization between transportation and manufacturing processes.

Scenario S2: Active cold‐chain monitoring

The scenario involves cold‐chain logistic operators and distributors of perishable goods. The objective is to improve monitoring of the cargo physical conditions and of the cargo delivery process.

Scenario S3: Cargo controlling transportation in 3PL services to final customer

The scenario involves 3PL companies, truck operators and consignees in the transportation of palletised cargo. The objective is to reduce inefficiencies and errors, allowing the departure of the cargo from a hub to trigger external scheduling at destination hubs.

Scenario S4: Cooperative warehousing through cargo‐centric information services

The scenario involves warehousing services companies, their cooperating transport operators and both consignors and consignees. The objective is to improve storage scheduling and deliveries forwarding.

Scenario S5: Self‐returning empty pallets and boxes

The scenario involves logistics operators transporting boxes and re‐distributing empties across different branches and distribution centres. The objective is to provide a complete traceability, documentation and observation of transports in real‐time and to achieve better utilization of empties.

Scenario S6: Cargo‐assisted intermodal transport

The scenario involves intermodal freight operators and railway companies. The objective is to improve customer service and efficient utilization of wagons in intermodal operations.

Scenario S7: Intelligent routing through cargo‐infrastructure cooperation

Deliverable D2.2:



The scenario involves road transport companies, their customers, inland terminals and motorway operators. The objective is to avoid congestion and accidents and to optimize utilization of road and parking infrastructures.

Scenario S8: Automated clearance and billing of transiting goods

The scenario involves authorities, customs, shipping agents and freight forwarders operating at international transit points. The objective is to speed up the transit of goods at international borders and to increase security levels.

The aim is not to cover all the possible activities in a generic transport process, but rather to map different relevant situations where Intelligent Cargo can be put into practice to the benefit of different stakeholders.


The EURIDICE project addresses the Brazilian and Argentinean barriers and thresholds through the following pillars:

- Improved synchronization between the players of freight transport chain, as a result of a holistic perspective of logistic processes throughout the entire transport chain, can optimize the operation in stuffing and stripping of containers in ports.

- The issue of port security in port terminals is tackled through an enhanced capability to monitor and trace the cargo provided by EURIDICE. The sustainable logistic systems promoted by EURIDICE, reduce security threats across the whole supply chain, thus, enhancing the operational safety of the cargo flow.

- End – to – end visibility of the cargo flow and improved information support to end customers tackles the communicational and informational problems at ports and meets the need for reliability and visibility of waterways.

- Capability to monitor, trace and safely handle moving goods at the required level of detail, reduces delays and errors and allows a faster and automated cargo management.

- The service platform built by EURIDICE will enable the users to a variety of services such as data acquisition to automated transaction and intelligent data analysis and decision support. The established interoperability platform for data interchange can meet the need for standardization of systems and documents.

3. Further reading

• References

− http://www.euridice‐project.eu

• Contact info

Mr. Paolo Paganelli

Insiel

Tel.: +39 040 3737001

E‐mail: [email protected]

Deliverable D2.2:



4.2.2. GIFTS

A. FACT BOX

Title Global Intermodal Freight Transport System

Programme 5th Framework Programme, Key Action I – Systems and services for the citizen

Implementation date

September 2001 – October 2004


Open access Internet portal/e‐marketplace providing high technology services to the transport and logistics industry in the EU, in particular addressing the needs of operators, service providers and end users working in small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs).


Despite of the existence of improved services and advanced technologies in the transport logistics, cross – border shipping presents a highly fragmented character: multiple hands‐off within the origin‐destination of the physical flow of goods, as well as the information flow, increase the possibility of breakdowns and errors. Logistic and transport must evolve to meet the demands of global supply chains, towards an end‐to‐end logistics integration and visibility.

GIFTS addressed the Task 1.5.1 (Intelligent Transport Infrastructures – 3rd bullet of Focus: Advanced IT (Intelligent Transport) systems for supporting logistics and co‐operative resource management for the whole transport chain) of the INFSO R&D program, focusing on optimizing freight transport in Europe. The project’s main goal was to improve and integrate existing and emerging intermodal freight transport technologies into one platform.

Key innovations GIFTS was a unique proposition, best described as an open access Internet portal/e‐marketplace, providing a comprehensive range of integrated services to the door‐to‐door management of intermodal freight transportation. GIFTS provides a neutral distributed IT environment for serviced‐oriented applications able to integrate different stand‐alone services, which, when combined together, can solve more complex business processes. GIFTS also delivers integration of the physical transport asset into the IT environment by means of advanced mobile terminal equipment.


The projects consortium was formed by the following participations:

• Telespazio Spa, Italy

• Thomas Miller & Co. Ltd, UK

Deliverable D2.2:



• Hellenic Institute of Transport, Greece

• Alcatel‐Bell Space, Belgium

• Transeuropean Consultants for Transport, Development and Information Technology S.A., Greece

• Dipartimento di Idraulica, Trasporti, Strade, Italy

• PTV Planung Transport Verkehr AG, Germany

• Proodos SA, Greece

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project detail

• Objectives

The main GIFTS objective was to design and develop, for the project pilot cases, a fully Integrated Operational Platform – the GIFTS Integrated operational Platform (GIP) ‐ for the use of systems that manage door‐to‐door freight transport in an intermodal as well as a uni‐modal sense. The main goal was to boost competition in the freight transport market by providing to SMEs access to high – technology services.

GIFTS provided applications for the operational (e.g. track, trace and monitor the door‐to‐door journey, aid in trip management, goods tracing and tracking, fleet management, etc), as well as all the e‐commerce functions and insurance of a door to door freight transport chain, in the fullest sense (i.e. including order matching, e‐document transfer, e‐payment, etc). The GIP also had its own administrative functions for registration, secured access, customer profiling, etc. It was mode independent i.e. it could be applicable to both uni‐modal as well as multimodal transport applications.

To accomplish the overall objectives, GIFTS had the following sub‐objectives:

1. Set up and operate in the pilot cases a European Freight Data Communications Network accessible from all users and also accessible from Galileo system.

2. Set up and operate a Global Freight Information System in order for the users to integrate ITS (Intelligent Transport Systems) into their transport services.

3. Provide an Architecture that combines and operates into a single integrated service a wide variety of freight transport‐related systems and services. Fleet management data collection under secure and confidential conditions was included.

4. Develop a fully‐operational administration system for the GIP to handle registration, authentication, security, etc. for the users, the freight transport operations and control functions and the communication system infrastructure between the Service Centre and Users provided with the related user terminals.

5. Define the intermodal aspects that the Platform should take into account in order to be applicable.

6. Develop pilot applications in order to demonstrate and test the GIFTS concepts for the GIP.

Deliverable D2.2:



7. Provide an independent and full evaluation of the new applications mentioned above under real working condition for road and rail transport operators and e‐commerce services.

8. Develop a realistic Exploitation Plan and set of applications that will be form a “total solution” for supply chain operators.

• Results

As can be seen in the following figure, a set of common platform services, including e‐commerce services and freight transport services, are available by GIFTS.

Figure 8: GIFTS freight transport operation services

Furthermore, GIFTS provides service to both mobile and fixed users using advanced, as well as standard, communication and navigation facilities:

- GPS (Global Positioning System) and EGNOS (European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Satellite system). They form the Navigation System.

- Wireless technology, such as GPS, ORBCOMM, GPRS and SUMTS (satellite UMTS) and wired technology, such as Internet/PSTN. Altogether they form the Communication System.

- An information system, providing services and using the communication and navigations systems between users’ systems and the GIFTS platform.

Deliverable D2.2:



Through its components, GIFTS implements a set of services divided into the three categories of Administrative Services, Freight transport and operational monitoring and control functions and E‐Commerce services.


The platform architecture is based on web services technology that enables a high level of automated business process integration where each SP is specialized in offering different applications.

GIFTS adopted the XML native standard for exchanging messages.

The GIFTS Integrated Platform is a distributed IT environment for services‐oriented applications. It is composed of the GIFTS Service Center (GSC – a physical system providing Administrative services), the Fixed Terminal (together with the Mobile Terminal they constitute the User Terminal through which the user accesses the system) and four (4) Service Providers (SP ‐ specialized platforms to provide a set of services, enabling host access to one or more specific Service Modules, which are software objects providing dedicated applications and specific XML‐based interface to invoke them).

The Mobile Terminal is the second main component of the GIFTS system and it consists of a portable processing unit equipped with communication and navigation components, over which the GIFTS application software is installed.

Figure 9: GIFTS platform architecture

Deliverable D2.2:



• Main benefits

GIFTS users benefit from greatly improved real‐time information along the length of the supply chain, improved security and safety procedures, real reductions in inventory due to shorter lead times, real reductions in losses caused by fraud or lack of adequate control. In addition, the GIFTS system provides transporters with real‐time monitoring of freight, they can plan with high precision the movement of goods, modify routes, and, in general, improve their control over the whole process, resulting in reduced delivery time, more efficient use of carriers and therefore potentially important cost savings.


Strengths:

- The GIFTS services have open access and a comprehensive set of functionalities while they are largely integrated and accessible to large and small users.

- GIFTS has developed a one‐stop‐shop web‐based platform which provides transport companies with the opportunity of fleet, cargo and route management, all in one place.

Weaknesses:

- The problems of electronic trading should be addressed (i.e. vulnerability to computer viruses and data protection).

- Liability issues regarding offering services across borders and payment risks should be identified.

• Examples of application (pilots)

Three (3) pilots were conducted in order to test and validate the GIFTS Demonstrator (GIFTS prototype):

- Pilot 1: Road freight transportation. It demonstrated the way the GIFTS system supports a door‐to‐door road movement.

- Pilot 2: Rail freight transportation. It demonstrated the way GIFTS can assist rail transport with consolidation or wagons, full train preparation and delivery to final terminal.

- Pilot 3: E‐Commerce simulation. It investigated the potential of GIFTS e‐commerce services to be provided to the transport industry in conjunction with suppliers of Internet‐based services.


The target areas of Latin America could benefit from the use of GIFTS services in the following fields:

- GIFTS system provides real time monitoring of the cargo. The need for reliability and visibility of waterways can be met through the implementation of tracking systems for the cargo status and position.

- Improved security and safety procedures along the length of the supply chain tackles the problems of adequate operational safety and lack of port security, especially in relation to additional costs and their impact on competitiveness.

Deliverable D2.2:



- GIFTS meets the demand for real time information systems for managing and controlling the total door‐to‐door transport chain.

3. Further reading

• References: - GIFTS website: http://www.newapplication.it/gifts - GIFTS leaflet: http://www.newapplication.it/gifts/project_deliverables/public/GIFTS_LEAFLET.pdf

- GIFTS brochure: http://www.newapplication.it/gifts/project_deliverables/public/GIFTS_BROCHURE.pdf

- PROMIT project deliverable D3.3: http://www.promit‐project.net/UploadedFiles/Deliverables/PROMIT_BPH3_April09_cp_MSR.pdf

• Contact info: Mr. Sergio Proietti Telespazio S.p.A. Tel: +39 06 4079 3783 E‐Mail: [email protected] URL: www.telespazio.it

4.2.3. Parcelcall

A. FACT BOX

Title An Open Architecture for Intelligent Tracing Solutions in Transport and Logistics

Programme 5th Framework Programme, Information Society Technologies (IST) Programme

Implementation date January 2000 – December 2001


Open architecture for intelligent tracking and tracing in transport and logistics.


The increasingly demand on accuracy and up‐to‐date information within the supply chain, regardless of the modes in use or the carriers involved, calls for advanced technologies in the field of tracking and tracing systems. Despite of the fact that many transport and logistics businesses possess this kind of systems, these are typically proprietary solutions, supporting, mainly, larger companies. Smaller companies cannot afford high investments in intelligent systems for sorting, planning and routing, which would enable them to deliver value added services. Furthermore, continuous information about the current position or status of transport goods is not commonly available. The information is, typically, provided at a vehicle or container level only.

ParcelCall focused on interoperability, open interfaces, and standardization in order to allow seamless tracking and tracing across the entire logistics and transportation chain. Its open and scalable system architecture, allows its extension by adding new server

Deliverable D2.2:



components, as well as its adaptation both by small tracking and tracing services and huge multinational integrators.

Key innovations Parcelcall key innovations can be identified through the developed system and its architecture. Their components are described below:

• Complemented 1‐D and 2‐D bar code labels by Radio‐Frequency Identification (RFID) tags (passive tags) which enable automatic identification upon transhipping, without the need for manually handling and scanning.

• Active “Thinking Tags”, developed by the project, which combine active short‐range communication capabilities with sensing, memory and computing power.

• Development of a Mobile Logistic Server (MLS) for each transport unit, which keeps track of the goods within the unit (trucks, freight wagons, containers).

• Development of a Goods Tracing Servers (GTS) which consolidated the various ParcelCall Servers and the carrier’s IT system.

• Development of the Goods Information Server (GIS), which provides customers status information about their moving goods.


The project’s consortium was composed by leading European industrial and academic partners, namely:

• Ericsson Eurolab Deutschland GmbH, Germany

• Siemens Dematic AG , Germany

• Philips Electronics UK Limited, United Kingdom

• Lesswire AG , Germany

• TNT Post Group N.V. , Netherlands

• Aachen University of Technology, Department of Computer Science IV , Germany

• University of Edinburgh, Research Centre for Social Sciences, Germany

• Hammer GmbH & Co. KG , Germany

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

ParcelCall objective was to implement an intelligent end‐to‐end tracking and tracing solution across all borders of carrier and transportation modes. Parcelcall drew on technologies such as RFID tags, Internet and GPRS and delivered a system for real‐time tracing information. The approach included:

- An open tracking and tracing architecture across the logistic chain.

- Integration of active sensors, which enable the monitoring and controlling of the environmental conditions and the quality status of the consignments.

Deliverable D2.2:



- Incorporation of communications sensors, which provided alert messages in case of default situations.

The main objective was to develop a new, unified information and communication plane, hence enabling seamless tracking and tracing solutions. The key design criterion was the adaptation of legacy systems operated by the carriers to the new information infrastructure, as well as the provision of a standardised interface among all system components.

• Results

Parcelcall developed an open Architecture, integrating software prototype of Thinking Tags and active alert services. The components are described below:

- 1‐D and 2‐D bar code labels by Radio‐Frequency Identification (RFID) tags (passive tags) were complemented, thus enabling static information like identity, sender, and destination address to be transmitted to an RFID reader upon transhipping without the need for manually handling and scanning.

- Active “Thinking Tags”, which provide sensing, computing and memory functionality along with active short‐range communication capabilities. More specifically the Thinking Tags provide:

o Continuous measuring and monitoring of environmental conditions for sensitive shipment at the level of individual pieces.

o Active alerting in case of an alarm.

o Recording of the history of a shipment in order to provide evidence in liability issues.

- Development a Mobile Logistic Server (MLS) inside each transport unit, which is aware of the unit’s current location and the identity of the contained goods.

- Development of a Goods Tracing Servers (GTS) which consolidated the various ParcelCall Servers and the carrier’s IT system. The network of GTS servers uses public communication networks (i.e. Internet) as a communication backbone and makes tracking and tracing information available using unified interfaces (API’s).

- Development of the Goods Information Server (GIS), which provides customers status information about their moving goods. The GIS serves as a gateway between the GTS system and a multitude of mobile and fixed end‐user devices, e.g. mobile phones.


As depicted in the following figure, the Parcelcall system consists of different servers and tag readers. Each transport good is identified by a passive or active tag. The latter are equipped with an air‐interface and sensors, enabling them to send alarm messages if certain environment constraints are exceeded. The identified information stored to a passive tag is read by a tag leader and transferred to a Mobile Logistic Server (MLS) inside the transport unit. Using the tag reader and, for example, the GPS satellite positioning system the MLS is aware of its current location and the identity of the goods.

Through public and wireless data communication networks, this information is relayed to a network of Good Tracing Servers (GTSs) operated by the different transport and logistic companies, who then make the information available through public communication networks (i.e. internet). A Goods Information Server (GIS) serves as a

Deliverable D2.2:



gateway between the distributed GTS system and a multitude of mobile and fixed end‐user devices, i.e. mobile phones, PDA’s, PC’s.

Figure 10: The Parcelcall Architecture

• Main benefits

- Detailed tracking and status information can be available in real‐time and for each complete transport cycle ‐ even if a single item out of a large shipment gets lost, damaged, or takes a different route to the rest of the shipment.

- The Thinking Tags form ad‐hoc networks that can be applied to the surveillance of shipments consisting of multiple items, to self‐adapting hierarchical packing schemes (e. g., parcels containing smaller parcels) or to active status monitoring of critical freight contents.

- Thinking Tags can be particularly useful for perishable, sensitive and high‐risk goods (such as pharmaceuticals). This provides invaluable information in the case of theft or loss, and helps in settling liability issues if damage or mishandling has occurred. Application of Thinking Tags to high‐valued items or goods can justify the cost of the active devices.


Deliverable D2.2:



Strengths:

- The passive RFID tags are available at moderate costs and can be easily integrated into labels with printed and bar code information.

- The Parcelcall system architecture is simple to implement – no need to modify existing IT infrastructures, and easy to maintain, easily accessible, scalable ‐ has no problem in installing additional servers if needed, reliable and secure.

- The open tracking and tracing system provides functionality irrespective of transport modes.

- Even very small companies which do not have their own tracking and tracing system can utilise the Parcelcall services.

Weaknesses:

- Consistency and completeness of information deliveries need to be controlled.


Not applicable.


The Parcelcall technology can be successfully implemented in the target areas of Latin America in the following fields:

- Real time monitoring of the cargo. The need for reliability and visibility of waterways can be met through the implementation of tracking systems for the cargo status and position.

- Improved security and safety procedures along the length of the supply chain tackles the problems of adequate operational safety and lack of port security, especially in relation to additional costs and their impact on competitiveness.

- Parcelcall tracking and tracing solutions meet the demand for real time information systems for managing and controlling the total door‐to‐door transport chain.

3. Further reading

• References

- http://cordis.europa.eu/search/index.cfm?fuseaction=proj.document&PJ_RCN=5108557

- http://www‐i4.informatik.rwth‐aachen.de/parcelcall/

- http://www‐i4.informatik.rwth‐aachen.de/parcelcall/publications/IST‐Summit2000.pdf

• Contact info

Mr. Jens Hartmann

Research Department

Deliverable D2.2:



Ericsson Eurolab Deutschland GmbH Tel: +49 24 07572101

4.2.4. Mtrade

A. FACT BOX

Title Multimodal Transportation supported by EGNOS


Implementation date September 2005 – March 2007


European platform to promote EGNOS and Galileo in the multimodal transport community.


M‐TRADE pursued the main goal of pulling the introduction of GNSS positioning technologies (EGNOS and future GALILEO services) in the multimodal freight transport user community, thus contributing to the set‐up of technological measures towards the exploitation of combined transport across main trans‐European corridors, and in line with EU policies of a sustainable transport system.

Key innovations M‐TRADE was the first step towards the operative use of GNSS in Multimodal freight applications and showed the way for future steps in the Regulated applications domains.


The M‐TRADE Consortium was composed of fifteen partners, from seven different European countries (Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands,Spain). The Consortium was leaded by Telespazio and constituted of some major European companies together with SMEs (participating for about 20% of the overall project work), and Research Institutes, with complementary positions in the value chain and skills covering all required technical competences. Satellite companies with GNSS know‐how, service providers and operators, technology developers and vendors, system integrators, ITS technology suppliers, application software developers, institutional actors, market experts, intermodal freight transport users, were amongst the key profiles of the companies involved.

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

The main goals of M‐Trade project are presented below:

- Availability of a positioning system, common for the various transport modes that allows precise and reliable freight localisation and tracking during the journey.

- Timely and complete information exchange among all involved actors, to enable the seamless, safe and secure transfer of goods from one mode to another.

Deliverable D2.2:



- Integration of reliable position information (Integrity information) for the tracking of dangerous and/or abnormal goods in the supply chain management.

• Results

M‐TRADE solution is an integrated end‐to‐end system to provide users with: tracking & tracing of goods; identification of freight and efficient transhipment at terminals and nodes; monitoring of safe transport of hazardous and perishable goods.

M‐TRADE work was deployed through three sequential phases:

- Phase I – “Critical Analysis”: it performed the analysis and assessment of “service enablers” for GNSS applications in the freight multimodality transportation sector in order to: outline a panorama of the transport multimodality, in terms of main players and decision makers; investigate the current use of GNSS technologies in the sector; identify GNSS “priority applications” and evaluate relevant market needs. The results of this phase are presented as follows:

• Dangerous Goods tracking & tracing. Tank wagons (rail) and tank vessel (river) remote localisation & visualisation on digital maps; Geo‐fencing (position & time with respect to pre‐defined path/time), alarming in case of deviation /unplanned stops; Warning in case of anomalous conditions detection.

• Perishable Goods tracking & tracing. Reefers (specialised refrigerated swap bodies) remote localisation & visualisation on digital maps; Goods temperature monitoring / identification details; Shipment monitoring: “right destination / right time”, temperature; Alarming in case of unplanned stops, goods information / temperature anomalous conditions.

• Containers tracking & tracing. Container remote localisation & visualisation on digital maps; correct loading & unloading of containers.

- Phase II – “Implementation”: It performed the definition of the “M‐TRADE Action Plan” and the implementation and execution of the real‐pilots. The Implementation phase was performed in three main steps:

• Identification and definition of the “M‐TRADE Action Plan”. The step provided a realistic snapshot of possible M‐Trade services implementation roadmap in short (2010) and medium‐long (2015‐2020) terms.

• Specification and implementation of the M‐Trade solution. The step developed a solution providing user‐oriented GNSS services for freight containers and swap bodies tracking & tracing.

• M‐TRADE demonstration execution in four real‐life operating scenarios and result collection.

- Phase III – “Results Analysis”: It performed the assessment of the results gathered during the demonstrations and definition of main recommendation and guidelines for a successful promotion of GNSS services in the considered User Community. M‐TRADE identified opportunities for GNSS and combinations of GNSS technology and ICT in Customs operations.


The main elements of the M‐TRADE solution are the following:

Deliverable D2.2:



- On Board Unit (OBU) that collected data from GPS and from the SISNET server using GPRS. These units were designed to interface RFID tags, active read/write tags for safety applications, such as automatic identification of the transported goods and information related to status/tampering alarm.

- Data Servers that gathered data from OBUs, processed and made them available to the end users, through the M‐TRADE Multimodal Centre (MMC).

- The Genoa port CCS (Cargo Community System) linked to the VTS (Vessel Traffic System), that stored and provided information related to the sea vessel / cargo (such as time of arrival at port, data related to dangerous goods transport);

- The Danube RIS (via donau), called “River Server”, which provided transport information to serve both traffic and transport management needs, relevant to the inland waterway path (in particular, in case of dangerous goods transport, it collects and provides the relevant data);

- The Interporto Bologna SIMOG enduser application.

- The MTRADE Multimodal Centre (MMC, Telespazio), which was the core of the system. It was a distributed service segment framework providing end‐to‐end delivery services to users. The M‐TRADE Multimodal Centre interfaced the Mobile Units, through the relevant Data Servers. It was in charge of collecting and harmonising all the gathered information, and delivering it via Web Interfaces or via the dedicated end‐user application.

Figure 11: A graphical overview of demonstrative elements

• Main benefits

The identified benefits are:

Deliverable D2.2:



- Usefulness of the services with respect to service quality and liability. - Identified benefits: economical, operational and strategic. - Possibility for the operators to have a correct and real‐time flow of information and data along the supply chain.

- Availability of a common, standard and controlled positioning system for all transport modes, for guaranteeing homogeneous services that provide cost‐effective pan‐European unit load transport haulage, minimise overall costs, while meeting required security and service levels.


Strengths:

- Service access is very easy to use, no huge training effort required.

- Complete approach over Europe and for all sectors of a multimodal chain.

- Direct involvement of final users.

- Close cooperation with actors involved.

Some weaknesses regard technical gaps and obstacles, for which action should be taken, in order for the EGNOS/Galileo systems to be applicable, such as:

- Mobile Equipment technology.

- ICT platform standards.

- RFID technologies and different usage of frequencies.

- Certification.

Other weaknesses regard:

- Lack of awareness of big potential users.

- No clear service cost.

- Slow regulatory processes for the future large scale implementation.

- High communication costs.


M‐trade performed four pilots over European freight chains combining maritime‐road‐rail‐river:

Pilot 1: Bologna Freight Village. Remote monitoring of locomotives position and manoeuvres during shunting operations.

Pilot 2: Rail (Brescia‐Bologna) and Road (Bologna‐Modena) chain. Tracking and tracing and temperature monitoring of a reefer carrying perishable goods.

Pilot 3: Danube River (Vienna‐Budapest round trip). Tracking & tracing of a river vessel loaded with petrol, through three European countries (Austria, Slovakia and Hungary).

Pilot 4: Rail chain Genoa‐Ferrandina‐Dordrecht Zeehaven. Tracking & tracing of a tank rail wagon loaded with oil products, through four European countries (Italy, Switzerland, Germany and Netherlands).

Deliverable D2.2:



The demonstration was conceived to validate EGNOS Commercial Service provisioning architectures and schemes in the freight transport application domains, towards operative use in professional and regulated markets.


- Precise and reliable freight localisation and tracking during the journey tackles issues of reliability and visibility of waterways, port security at port terminals and lack of adequate operational safety at border crossings.

- Timely and complete information exchange among all involved actors deals with problems of communication and information flow at ports.

- Integration of reliable position information (Integrity information) for the tracking of dangerous and/or abnormal goods in the supply chain management deals with the issue of dangerous goods handling.

3. Further reading

• References

- M‐trade website: http://www.newapplication.it/mtrade/mtrade_home.html

- M‐trade leaflet: http://galileo.cs.telespazio.it/mtrade/public/leaflets/MTRADE‐leaflet.pdf


• Contact info

Ms. Antonella Di Fazio

Tel: + 39 06 4079 6329

[email protected]

Deliverable D2.2:



4.3. Standardization 4.3.1. FREIGHTWISE

A. FACT BOX

Title Sustainable surface transport ‐ Rebalancing and integrating different transport modes

Programme 6th Framework Programme of the European Commission (2002‐2006)

Implementation date 31/10/2006 – 30/04/2010


Generic system architecture for intermodal transport chain management


FREIGHTWISE’s overall objective was to support the modal shift of cargo flows from road to intermodal transport using road in combination with short sea shipping, inland waterways and rail by means of improved management and facilitation of information access and exchange between large and small, public and private stakeholders across all business sectors and transport modes.

FREIGHTWISE also aimed to promote EU‐policies encouraging the development of open and interoperable systems, which meet the requirements of cargo owners, transport operators and intermodal freight integrating services. The aim was to support the Commission in formulating future legislation and in developing initiatives that can provide a platform on which the industry can develop management solutions, thus helping to increase the competitiveness of intermodal transport.

Key innovations FREIGHTWISE provides innovation based on results from previous R&D (Research and Development) and a close co‐operation with the stakeholders. The frameworks and architectures of other projects in the transport sector have been used as an input for the FREIGTWISE Framework Architecture (FWF‐A), together with mode specific development work as in the case of TSI and RSI.

The aim was to use FWF‐A as a basis for developing process‐oriented business models and tools for planning and execution of intermodal transport operations. These business models and tools were used and evaluated in real‐life business cases, with some of them becoming FREIGHTWISE demonstrators. The project was timed in such a way so that more than one full cycle in the project would exist, covering framework development, process orientated business models, tools and systems, demonstration (where applicable) and evaluation. During the life of the project the results fed the policy development and standardisation work. Once the FWF‐A was developed, it promoted an increased development and utilisation of open and “free” systems for management of intermodal transport operations.

Further to the above, FREIGHTWISE contributed to the standardisation of the definition of generic transport services, so that the same service description can be re‐used by those transport chain management systems that are obeying the “rules” defined in FREIGHTWISE. Thereby, a catalogue of ‘Virtual Transport Services’ was established.



• Transport operators and authorities

Deliverable D2.2:



• Road, rail and waterborne administrators.

• Industry and distribution leaders, logistics outsourcers (3PLs).

• Research organizations and universities.

• ICT developers.

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

The basic aims of the project were:

− To Support a directive to facilitate the development of intermodal transport management;

− To provide business guidelines for intermodal transport management;

− To provide a system architecture for intermodal transport management – the FREIGHTWISE Architecture Framework;

− To Provide a Virtual Transport Network for easy presentation of and access to details of transport attributes and supporting services that are part of efficient intermodal transport operations;

− To Provide a Stakeholder Framework to support agreements among partners in the intermodal chain;

− To Provide tools for intermodal transport management;

− To Support the development of standards in intermodal transport;

− To Disseminate the new possibilities developed in FREIGHTWISE to the stakeholders.

• Results

The main result of the project was the generic system architecture for intermodal transport management and support in the use of management tools. Other than this, the project provided business guidelines for intermodal transport management while it also created a Virtual Transport Network for easy presentation of and access to details of transport attributes and supporting services that are part of efficient intermodal transport operations. Finally, in an attempt to spread the innovative results of FREIGHTWISE to the academic and business communities of freight transport, the partners have developed education and training materials based on the core product of the project, the FREIGHTWISE Framework (FWF). This material is addressed to MSc students and professionals in the freight business.

The main result of Freightwise is the FWF. FWF is composed of Roles, Functions, Processes and Information Packages:

− Roles: A role represents all stakeholders with the same set of responsibilities. Thus, the concept of roles within Freightwise makes it easier to make references to stakeholders and units in a more generic way. The roles are related to the

Deliverable D2.2:



stakeholders via responsibilities. A stakeholder can have one or more roles and one role can also be shared by more than one stakeholder. Four superior roles have been identified to be essential to freight transport and depict the Freightwise Roles shown in the following figure.

Figure 12: The Freightwise Framework

− Functions: The functional viewpoint in the Freightwise Framework describes the main functions belonging to the sub‐areas in the Reference Model. Closely related to these functions, within each sub‐area, are the responsibilities that the Roles have. Therefore, functions have been defined per Role involving: Planning, Transport service marketing, Order management, Booking management, Hazardous goods management, and others.

− Processes: The process viewpoint describes the overall process that is taking place during the three main phases in Freightwise: Planning, Execution and

Deliverable D2.2:



Completion. The process viewpoint is depicted by means of a UML activity diagram (see figure below), and shows the four Freightwise roles involved, the functions to be performed by each of the roles, as well as the exchange of information (by means of Information Packages) between the roles.

Traffic ManagerTransport Serv ice Prov iderTransport User Transport Regulator

Hazardious goods management

TEP

Planning NTS

Transport serv icemarketing

Order managementTEPNTS

Transport operationmonitoring

TES

TEP

TOS

TIS

NTS

TEP

Statistics and management/ Information administration

Taxes and customsmanagement

TEP

Statistics

STA

Transport serv icedemand definition

Bookingmanagement

TEP

Transport taskcontrol

TES

TIS

Transport tasktermination

STA

Transport networkutilisation

NTS

TOS

Com

plet

ion

Exec

utio

nPl

anni

ng

TSD

Figure 13: The FWF process viewpoint

− Information Packages: The Information Viewpoint details the information packages being distributed between the activities defined in the Process Viewpoint and Functional Viewpoint. Their description has at first been defined at a conceptual level and then, through iterations including discussions with relevant stakeholders both within and outside the Freightwise project, their information content was further developed. Three of these packages have, during the project, been harmonised with the UBL (Universal Business Language) standard and the remaining packages will be brought into the e‐Freight project as subject to further harmonisation efforts. The FWF information packages are the following:

TSD – Transport Service Description

TEP – Transport Execution Plan

TES – Transport Execution Status

TNS – Transportation Network Status

TOS – Transport Operation Status

GII – Goods Item Itinerary

The FWF Information Packages are the most important components of the FWF, which demonstrates the standardization and harmonization character of the Freightwise project.

Deliverable D2.2:




− When stakeholders are using the FWF information packages, communication to all other companies that have implemented the same will be easy: there is no need to harmonise the use of the messages as is the case when using UN/CEFACT or UBL. The implementation of the information packages may take two forms:

The specification and an accompanying implementation guideline such that IT people can do the implementation themselves.

Through interfaces i.e. a web interface using web forms or an API that may be used to connect the FWF information packages to legacy systems.

− The Plug‐and‐Play Transport Chain Management (PnP TCM): The PnP TCM is a concept for a completely distributed freight transport management that may function without a central database that describes the services that are offered by the transport service providers.

• Main benefits

Five areas to which the project had provided benefits have been identified:

1. Standardization and harmonization: The aim was to create input for a European standard framework for the development and integration of ICT systems and modules in intermodal freight transport management. If FWF becomes a de facto standard, the availability of interoperable software solution will be significantly improved, and so will the competitiveness of intermodal transport. The same applies to the Information Packages, which aim to standardize the messaging process among industrial parties of the freight transport business.

2. Interoperability in intermodal transport chains: Freightwise set out to create a framework which, together with technical standardisation and the alignment of business rules, would contribute to interoperability, in terms of information exchange between stakeholders, business models and processes. The project envisages creating a Directive (or suggestion for a possible Directive) for Interoperability in intermodal transport chains.

3. Industrial competitiveness: The Freightwise project will make intermodal transport more competitive. As a result, European industries will be able to reduce costs and become more competitive, and at the same time develop more environmentally friendly solutions.

4. Co‐modality: The focus of Freightwise was on co‐modal freight transport. Hence, the architectural framework that was used and further developed in Freightwise included all aspects related to co‐modal freight transport. This holds true even in the light of the revised EU transport policy where the concept of co‐modality has been introduced. All transport modes should be used to the best of their ability, alone or in combinations.

5. Innovation: Once the FWF has been developed, it promotes an increased development and utilisation of open and “free” systems for management of intermodal transport operations. The project brought a new concept on transport chain planning and management, and it promotes a great modernization drive in

Deliverable D2.2:



the field of framework architectures, envisaging a solid foundation for future ICT initiatives.


During the course of the validation of the FWF, a SWOT analysis was conducted. The main strengths that were identified are the following:

− FWF is technology independent (adaptability to existing systems, complementarity with existing ICT solutions, independent from technology changes).

− FWF has a co‐modal focus.

− FWF is suitable for both large companies and for SMEs.

− FWF is simple.

− FWF contributes to harmonization.

− FWF contributes to interoperability between systems.

− FWF is available at low cost and the implementation cost of FWF is low.

− FWF contributes to standardization.

On the other hand, the most important weaknesses that were identified are the following:

− The degree to which FWF adapts well to existing processes (requires low process change) is questionable.

− The implementation of FWF may arise some legal challenges.

− The implementation of FWF may arise some security concerns.


The Freightwise Framework was tested in nine business cases:

CASE A: Northwest

Developing management solutions for combinations of road, rail and maritime transport from Scandinavia to United Kingdom (UK) and the European Continent; the modal mix, the long distances involving operators in several countries and the high demands for transport quality require good management tools and better access to information. The aim is to create solutions that help to provide robust transport services and are able to meet the requirements of production sites and customers in Norway, Sweden, Finland and UK.

CASE B: Northeast

Developing and testing a cross‐border transport network information system including both crossborder sea links (Finland – Estonia) and land transport links (Finland – Russia and Estonia – Russia) and terminal points where the goods are shifted from one transport mode to another, from land transport (lorry, train) to sea transport and vice

Deliverable D2.2:



versa or from lorry to train. The aim is to reduce waiting times at border crossings and for pick up or delivery of cargo units in the ports.

CASE C: West

RAFTS is an European Economic Interest Group (EEIG) formed by players with an interest in moving cargo from road to through rail services from the continent to the UK, via a rail ferry between Ijmuiden and the Humber area. RAFTS’ objectives in FREIGHTWISE is to define an information system which can support the planned RoRo and rail service and increase its competitiveness.

CASE D: Central

Demonstrating an innovative solution for providing SMEs with low cost intermodal management capabilities, by implementing a portal for intermodal transport management on a network of services in transport hubs and on links from Benelux to the Baltic.

CASE E: Benelux

Promoting the use of electronic message exchange between the parties and demonstrating how to make better use of traffic information for strategic, tactical and operational planning, and for more efficient operation of ports and road operation.

CASE F: Elbe

Assessing the feasibility of replacing the present paper based documentation with an electronic information management for transport of project loads from the manufacturer to the export port with a special focus in inland waterway transport; also developing a common view within the business sector on the information to be exchanged and to identify the parties and the drivers responsible for this to happen.

CASE G: South east

Supporting rail‐based solutions for import/export to/from_Greece (Thessaloniki) via the Balkan states into Germany, by improving the intermodal management systems across modes, borders, public administrations and private companies in new and old member states.

CASE H: South west

Exploring the preconditions for improving intermodal transport solutions of industrial producers and providing input for general review of logistics strategies by integrating et al. the production sites in the logistics solutions.


Excessive bureaucracy distressing the international transport in Brazil and Argentina could be dealt with Freightwise provision of a clear concept of the roles and

Deliverable D2.2:



responsibilities of each stakeholder involved in a transport chain. Taxes and customs management provided to the transport regulators can assure the quick flow of the international transport. Furthermore, a cross‐border transport network information system was developed and tested through a business study with the aim to reduce waiting times at border crossings. Its results could be properly adjusted to the LA needs as well.

Additionally, one of Freightwise main objectives was the modal shifting of cargo flows from road to rail, short sea shipping and inland waterways. Managerial assistance to transport users and service providers through the entire chain of planning, execution and completion, as well managerial assistance to the traffic manager for the planning of the transportation can successfully lead to an effective intermodal transport, hence making it more competitive against the single use of road.

Freightwise promotes an increased development and utilisation of open and free systems for management of intermodal transport operations. The promoted modernization drive in the field of framework architectures could set a solid foundation for future ICT initiatives, leading to enforcement of custom controls and procedures.

Finally, Freightwise has a strong harmonization and standardization character depicted through the FWF Information Packages that aims to standardize the messaging process among industrial parties of the freight transport business. A cross‐border transport network information system was developed and tested through a business study with the aim to reduce waiting times at border crossings. In another business case the feasibility of replacing the present paper based documentation with an electronic information management was assessed. Freightwise could address the LA barriers and thresholds through the calibrated results of its case studies, by providing, in an institutional and regulatory level, standardization of systems and documents and harmonization of custom control services.

3. Further reading

• References

− D.11.1_Freight_Market_Structure_and_Requirements_for_Intermodal_Shifts.pdf

− D.12.3_Requirements_Handbook.pdf

− D12.4_High_Level_Formal_Model_Final.pdf

− D13.1_Harmonisation_Strategy.pdf

− D13.2_Freightwise_Framework_Architecture_release_1.pdf

− D13.4_Recommendations_for_Standardisation‐Final.pdf

− D16.8_Training_Material.pdf

− D17.1a_Evaluation Framework_Final.pdf

− D17.1b_Validation_Plan_Framework_Final.pdf

− D19.1_Identification_of_multiplierspolicies_and_directive_initiatives_Final.pdf

− www.freightwise.info

• Contact info

Deliverable D2.2:



Mrs Jenny Gyngell

BMT

Goodrich House

1 Waldegrave Road

Teddington

Middlesex, TW11 8LZ

UK

Tel: +44 (0) 208 943 5544

Deliverable D2.2:



4.4. Logistics 4.4.1. KOMODA

A. FACT BOX

Title Co‐modality – towards optimised integrated chains in freight transport logistics


Implementation date 01/01/2008 ‐ 31/12/2009


Road map for the implementation of a European e‐logistics tool


The KOMODA project was an answer to the research objectives launched by call TPT 2007.2 concerning the optimization of the logistics chain through co‐modality. More precisely, KOMODA’s objective was to produce a roadmap, with associated action plans, to nurture an integrated e‐Logistics platform by and between modes of freight transport across Europe. Such platform should comply with a series of basic requirements such as:

• to be based in open standards,

• to be usable by anyone concerned,

• to be able to communicate freely between existing applications and allow the integration of legacy systems and future development.

Key innovations The key innovation of the project was the proposal of a sophisticated E‐logistics system architecture by combining the available infrastructure and services at a European level and integrating state‐of‐the‐art modules. The project provided a rather futuristic approach as there is further research proposed in order to achieve the structure concluded by the project.


The project has implemented several surveys contacting a wide variety of logistics stakeholders i.e. shippers, customs, IT development companies, logistics services providers, transport service providers, terminal operators. The partners of the project were:

• Instytut Logistyki i Magazynowania, ILIM, Poland

• Maritime Association for Research and Innovation, MARI, Italy

• Univerza v Mariboru, Fakulteta za gradbeništvo, UNI‐MB, Slovenia

• Politechnika Pozna_ska, PUT, Poland

• TIS.pt, Consultores em Transportes, Inovação e Sistemas, SA, TIS.pt, Portugal

• Centre For Research and Technology Hellas, CERTH, Greece

• PTV Planung Transport Verkehr AG, PVT, Germany

• University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UNEW, United Kingdom

• University of Turku, U. Turku, Finland

• Mobisoft Oy, MOBISOFT, Finland

Deliverable D2.2:



B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

The basic aims of the project were to:

− Obtain a comprehensive picture of available e‐logistics applications used in transport operations.

− Provide a synthetic view of their sources, availability, functionality and use in companies.

− Provide a “state of the art” review to assess the current status of existing IT applications for e‐Logistics, joining information for all co‐modal solutions, this is, from single mode applications to intermodal applications.

− Classify, compare and synthesise the results from both perspectives of analysis in order to provide a clear picture of the e‐Logistics applications end user needs and validate them amongst the industry.

− Identify operational, economic and legal barriers to an integrated e‐logistic system Europe‐wide.

− Identify operational, economic and legal issues which are constructive to an integrated e‐logistic system Europe‐wide.

− Develop a structured and coherent action plan for innovation and change leading towards an integrated e‐Logistics system Europe‐wide. The KOMODA roadmap will be a time‐based plan which – on the basis of the present situation polled and surveyed in WP1, will define the targets and objectives for an integrated e‐Logistics system in Europe.

− To create a vision and strategic path, overcoming barriers and exploiting the opportunities.

• Results

The main concept of co‐modality as well as previous results of KOMODA project, i.e. user needs and their understanding and the deep analysis of obstacles and opportunities have formed the general basis for the vision of the future e‐logistics platform that supports co‐modality. Based on those observations the vision has been designed in the 10‐15 years horizon. To realize this vision the concept of system landscape, i.e. system architecture can be proposed. It defines the most important elements, their common and unique relations. Since the target of KOMODA project was to produce a vision, the e‐Logistics system architecture was also drafted as visionary description of distributed and ICT supported logistics processes. In the future it can be concretised by elaborating an idea of core architecture, which was not objective within the KOMODA project at that time. The objective of the KOMODA project was more to define the area of possible application of e‐logistics system (on the transportation market as well as others, e.g. educational and further research purposed are also considered) and its feasibility study in the considered time horizon. The prospect (visionary) architecture of e‐Logistics system is presented in the figure below.

Deliverable D2.2:



Figure 14: The KOMODA architecture of eLogistics system

The system proposed by KOMODA could contribute to the integration of co‐modal transport processes and solutions. It consists of some important elements, i.e.:

− Data Warehouse Network

− Specialised applications

− User interface

− Communication module

Key Project conclusions:

1. The project KOMODA proposes the visionary Europe wide e‐Logistics system supporting co‐modality widely addressed to logistics management, transport policy makers as well as to logistics R&D units.

2. In the initial phase of the project’s works, the basic notions of e‐Logistics and co‐modality, relevant for the further consortium works were defined:

Deliverable D2.2:



a) e‐Logistics, not having yet its official definition was described as:” a set of activities based on using ICT systems and tools, as well as the Internet, as the main communication medium in order to maintain logistics process”.

b) co‐modality

The consortium made an attempt to substantiate the EC’s notion of co‐modality as activity aimed at:

− Strengthening and enhancing the use of different transportation modes, especially in combination.

− Searching for co‐operation between transportation modes.

− Emphasizing the idea of compromise solutions (trade‐offs, different stakeholders in the supply chain).

− Facilitating smooth communication between different supply chain links and various transportation modes.

3. The starting point for creating e‐Logistics system was the current state of the European e‐Logistics, which can be shortly characterized as very fragmented ‐ with the great number of proprietary applications tailored to the companies’ individual needs reflecting the fragmentation of the logistics market, unevenly developed – focusing on individual, unimodal and national solutions with insufficient support. Aspects as: intercompany co‐operation in supply chain, intermodality and international transport networks harmonisation are almost inaccessible for the great number of logistics market stakeholders. Small and medium sized enterprises usually cannot afford to deploy the advanced e‐Logistics applications what makes their market position unfavourable.

4. The proposed e‐Logistics system was well‐matched to the European logistics market realities which is fragmented both in supply and demand side and supported with multitude of ICT solutions covering different, fragmented aspects of logistics and transport management. In this situation the only logical solution fitting to the liberal market was an open‐structured decentralized system based on intelligent agents. The system was designed as combination of specialized ICT applications, tools, algorithms, procedures, libraries, data bases and external platforms, working in a common and transparent standard (other standards are converted). ICT solutions can be used selectively by the companies, customized to their own requirements.

5. Development of e‐Logistics in Europe will be driven by competition in the logistics market, technological progress in the ICT sector, advancement in methodologies supporting multi‐objective decisions in logistics, as well as progress in legislative harmonisation within the EU and effectiveness of implementation of legislation forcing the freight decision makers to respect ecological factors equally to economic ones.

6. The Road Map leading to creation of the e‐Logistics system presents the most likely, 15 years long, development scenario of many relevant aspects as : ITC technology, scientific methodology of the ICT supported decision making, harmonization of communication standards, data security, harmonization of transport and ICT related legislation of the EU members and logistics knowledge management.

Deliverable D2.2:



7. Anticipated trends, milestones and recommended actions were presented in three consecutive 5 year long periods. This intended simplification allowed a more transparent presentation of e‐Logistics developments anchored in time, as well as provided good basis for establishing priorities emerging in different phases.

8. It can be assumed that some of the problems will be solved as a result of market competition in the logistics market. The business sector will focus on solving such issues as:

− transparent inventory of all possible transport alternatives across all EU countries and modes,

− enhanced standardised and safe communication systems for co‐operation along supply chains,

− logistics decisions optimization tools,

− advanced application accessibility for the SME,

− development of the technology platforms,

− comprehensive co‐modal transport solutions,

9. The market‐based development of the e‐Logistics system can be considerably strengthened by adoption of the EU sponsored research strategy focused on the specified areas of improvements

10. The Report ended with the Action Plan which outlined in short, medium and long term perspective a number of initiatives that can contribute to accelerate the development of the e‐Logistics system enabling the European Commission better co‐ordination of its co‐modal transport policy.

11. It is recommended, in the further conception works on the e‐Logistics system, to establish basic assumptions for its implementation and development:

− Specification of the system elements in terms of applications and tools to be implemented in the first, preliminary phase.

− Organizational pattern of the preliminary implementation phase in terms of managing and implementing actors, their roles and system's financing (PPP).

− Organizational and financing patterns of the e‐Logistics system's management and development in the further phases.


The project proceeded with a solid state‐of‐the‐art review regarding the ICT tools that were used at that time for the logistics applications in Europe. Technologies for intelligent and efficient use of existing roads, rail and motorways, as well as of seaport and airport infrastructure, emerged. Standardisation of new technologies, such as radio‐frequency identification, Galileo and the global system for mobile communications (GSM), ease cross‐border traffic, make logistics and handling of goods more efficient and improve just‐in‐time deliveries. Moreover, these technologies could also ease congestion in cities. New and emerging technologies include:

− Radio‐frequency identification (RFID)

− GALILEO

Deliverable D2.2:



− Track and Tracing

− Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)

− Intelligent transport systems (ITS)

The following table depicts the IT elements that respond to the different logistics towards e‐logistics.

Table 2: The IT elements towards elogistics

• Main benefits

Specific benefits derived by users include:

− Access to database of the transport operators active in Europe, representing all transport modes. Possibility to compare their services time wise and freight wise creates chances for the alternative (to road) modes of transport to be taken into account in carrier choice procedures.

− Improvement of own logistics activities through access to decision support tools for optimizing: cargo flow processes, configuration of distribution network, routing, freight calculations, service providers choice, assets allocation, consolidation of volumes, e.t.c.

Deliverable D2.2:



− Obtaining assistance in modelling own supply chain structure and electronic communication models with the use of expert tools.

− Increase of logistics competence by access to e‐learning courses, best practices and on‐line consultancy.


The strengths of the project in terms of work undertaken that led to high quality results are the following:

− Extent literature review and project’s assessment on transport and logistic.

− Extent survey among stakeholders related to freight transport and logistics for evaluating the user requirements, the possible barriers for the implementation of the e‐logistics system and identification of the barriers.

− Consideration of both business and administration requirements.

− Strong assessment of existing and under development/deployment technologies for the logistics operation optimisation.

− Recognition of the barrier that would be encountered and proposition of the action for their alleviation.

− Consolidation of a plausible road map for the implementation of the system.

The main weaknesses of the project during its implementation that partly hindered the efficient work were the following:

− Low participation in technical meeting and stakeholders’ workshop.

− Different conception of the e‐logistics systems among the stakeholders and the geographical areas of Europe.

− Different priorities among the stakeholders by a European E‐logistics system.

− Low interest by large companies that develop and use their own legacy systems to provide their views.


Not applicable.


The main target of KOMODA is to define the area of possible application of e‐logistics systems and its feasibility study. Though the architecture of the e‐Logistics system is only drafted as a visionary description of distributed and ICT supported logistics processes, it could be supported that through the solid state‐of‐the‐art review of the above ICT technologies provided by KOMODA the transport operators will have access to database which will give them the opportunity to compare services and create chances for the alternative (to road) modes of transport. Shipping and rail could be reinforced, stimulating both co‐modality between the various transport modes and a modal shift away from the extensive use of road.

Deliverable D2.2:



Furthermore, the access to the decision support tool, also provided by KOMODA, will lead to development of logistics zones, where necessary, and improvement of logistics activities, thus resulting to optimization of cargo flow processes, freight calculations, consolidation of volumes, routing, configuration of distribution network, etc. In relation to the confronted LA barriers and thresholds, this could lead to a better handling of containers at ports, optimization of communication and information flow at ports and optimization of coordination procedures for receiving and delivery of container terminals in exports. Some of the IT elements towards e‐logistics (which will be presented by KOMODA), along with the barriers and needs of Brazil and Argentina to which they could respond are provided below:

• IT elements merging processes and transactions into a single platform could solve the need for an efficient customer interface at customs and terminals, simplifying and optimizing custom controls and procedures.

• Communication support tools provided through cargo monitoring systems, vehicle tracking and tracing systems and E‐commerce applications, can tackle the problems in communication and information flows at ports.

• The need for warehouse design could be met through transport resources allocation (fleet management) and full logic integration of multiple modes.

• IT elements that merge processes and transactions into a single platform and provide E‐commerce applications could solve the need for an efficient customer interface at border posts.

• Standardization of systems and documents and harmonization of control services and support at customs can be met through the merging of processes and transactions in a single platform which will be integrated in the E‐logistics needs.

3. Further reading

• References

− http://www.komodaproject.com/

• Contact info

Ewa Dobrzeniecka

Tel.: +48 61 850 49 32


Leszek Andrzejewski

Tel.: +48 61 850 48 79


4.4.2. BestLog

A. FACT BOX

Deliverable D2.2:



Title Logistics Best Practice

Programme

Implementation date 2006‐2010


Collection and dissemination of logistics best practices


In the last decade, before the downturn in 2008, the volumes of transportation had been increased significantly. It was also recognized that there was a lack of qualified supply chain personnel and transfer of SCM knowledge. This caused congestions and other problems, which were posed a threat for economic growth and efficiency in Europe.

Key innovations Establishing of a European Platform for collection, promoting and active dissemination of Logistics Best Practice.


Consortium consisted of 9 institutions from 9 countries:

• Berlin University of Technology (Germany)

• Kuehne Institute for Logistics at University of St. Gallen (Switzerland)

• METTLE (France)

• Reliant s.r.o. (Czech Republic)

• Warsaw School of Economics (Poland)

• Packaging, Transport and Logistics Research Institute‐ITENE (Spain)

• Uni. Oxford (UK)

• Chalmers University of Technology (Sweden)

• European Logistics Association (Belgium)

Advisory and Communications Board consists of 33 high level representatives from 19 countries (including China and the USA) from politics and industry.

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

BestLog aims to engage in an active dialogue stakeholders from all European countries and from across European industries and is asking both industry and government to contribute to the project by sharing business practice knowledge, by participating in workshops and conferences, and by sharing their experience.

The project’s targets are the following:

− Improved Supply Chain Practices

− Improved Supply Chain Education

− Reduce Differences across Europe

Deliverable D2.2:



− Setting Standards

− Create growth and jobs

− Achieve better match between EC policy and business decisions

• Results

To be able to tackle the problems and achieve the targets described above, the designed platform collects and disseminates the supply chain management knowledge on an ongoing basis. To initiate the continuous exchange of information, dissemination and promotion platform was established for two‐way information exchange in two main dimensions; SCM and Education.

Figure 15: Principle of bestLog platform

The project started with laying a theoretical foundation and problem description, after which the existing standards in education and certification were delivered through the regularly updated database. Also the methodology for assessing and collecting the Best Practice cases was put together. Case collecting followed a strict procedure to make sure that only relevant and useful cases were added to the database. Finally, the issues of best practice and innovations were illustrated through the platform.

Knowledge Base consists of following topics:

− Case Studies (studies of good logistics practice cases).

− Education Directory (bestLog course directory allows one to search or browse course directory with more than 400 courses listed).

− Logistics Awards Directory (contains a list of European Logistics Awards in several countries).

− Logistics Media Directory (lists more than 170 journals, newspapers and online publications, contains search functionality).

Deliverable D2.2:



− bestLog Toolsets (incl. tools for best practice logistics decision making, network planning, reconstructing logistics systems etc.).

− Useful Links (links to projects and associations).

In addition, the news, surveys, articles and publications concerning the bestLog are available in the project’s website.


The platform is working in web environment, which allows access to database from any location without any special applications needed.

• Main benefits

− Participants in the workshops and conference got access to first hand information on recent logistics developments, best practices and the European Commission's transport strategy.

− Exchange platform improves SCM practices, sets standards and disseminates knowledge regarding education and job opportunities across Europe.

− Online Toolsets and benchmarking of European companies.

The market success factors are:

− Business requirements and practices were discussed in four annual workshops. Each of the workshops concentrated on one focus industry and its requirements, which provided additional value for participants.

− BestLog's success depends heavily on the involvement of stakeholders from industry and governments.

− Continuous dissemination and promotion of activities has a key role in project’s success. Effective communication is at the core of the BestLog project.


Best practise benchmarking offers a valuable tool for improving the performance of logistics functions and lowering costs. Also the costs of producing best practise analysis are quite moderate compared to many other ways of conducting studies. Furthermore, the concept of arranging seminars and conferences produces added value and incentives for participants. There are also significant advantages in ongoing, self‐funding, non‐profit online dissemination.

Adapting the best practises does not necessary produce expected benefits. This may be due to the fact that not all of the good practices are suitable to be extended into different contexts. This aspect can be minimized by careful screening of cases.


Not applicable.


Deliverable D2.2:



BestLog establishes a European platform for the collection and promotion of European best practises in the field of logistics. Improved supply chain practices, improved chain education and set of standards, all provided in a web environment, could be a valuable tool to any one who wishes to improve the performance of his logistics function and lower the cost of the transport operation. In a general manner, this could address the following LA barriers and needs:

• Better handling the stuffing and stripping of containers in ports.

• Optimization of communication and information flow at ports.

• Lack of points of primary and secondary storage nodes with logistics to ensure the time scale of rail bulk solids and liquids.

• Incipient development of logistic zones.

• Nonstandard systems and documents.

3. Further reading

• References

− bestLogFlyer http://www.bestlog.org/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=0&file=fileadmin/bestlog/flyer.pdf&t=1281518809&hash=ae0ab3f2867edf2a05fa8cbfa8181aa6

− bestLogpresentation http://www.bestlog.org/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=0&file=fileadmin/bestlog/BestLog_short.pdf&t=1281518809&hash=f9863f9a7be551790b0159312e2de555

− BestLog website: http://www.bestlog.org/

4.4.3. BE LOGIC

A. FACT BOX

Title Benchmark Logistics for Co‐modality


Implementation date Started on September 1st, 2008 (duration of 30 months)


The project will define different benchmarking methodologies and analyze a number of relevant real cases.


While large companies may have their own experts to assess the transport options and select optimal logistics alternatives, small and medium enterprises (SME) may lack this expertise. The logistics process is complex, and SMEs with limited resources and assets may focus on the maximum involvement of their equipment (e.g. vehicle) instead of looking for potentially attractive alternatives. The project attempts to tackle this problem.

A benchmark of logistics chains can give SMEs insight into the potential gains of reconsidering their logistics choices in terms of costs and performances, environmental impact, quality of service.

Deliverable D2.2:



Key innovations Definition of benchmarking methodologies and development of a web‐based benchmarking tool.


• ECORYS Nederland BV

• Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics

• D’Appolonia (Italy)

• NewRail – University of Newcastle

• Mobycon (Nederland)

• Athens University of Economics and Business Research Center TRANSLOG

• Herry Consult GmbH (Austria)

• Vilnius Technical University – Competence Centre of Intermodal Transport and Logistics (VGTU)

• International Union of combined road‐rail transport companies

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

The ultimate goal of benchmarking logistics and co‐modality is to improve the quality and efficiency within and across different modes of transport. To support this, the key objectives of the project can be defined as follows:

− Improve the efficiency within and across different modes of transport.

− Support the development of a quality logistics system.

− Develop a methodology to assess transport logistics performance in quantitative terms at different levels in Europe and globally.

− Apply the benchmark methodology to assess logistics and intermodal policies of Member States and other countries.

− Assess transport logistics choices and performance from shippers/LSP.

− Assess transport logistics performance from transhipment points.

− Examine existing quality standards (e.g. ISO, CEN) for transport logistics.

− Consider the need for new quality standards for transport logistics.

The scope of BE LOGIC project is co‐modality. This implies that the project seeks logistics alternatives that offer the potential involvement of other modes, not only at terminal to terminal sections but also in door to door‐ and terminal to door services.

The approach of BE LOGIC in macro level looks at the policy perspective, legislation, barriers of co‐modality and what can be learned from other countries. In micro level, the attention is paid on the performance of both transport chains and terminals in terms of costs, performance (quality), the environmental impact of alternative transport chain solutions and terminal bottlenecks.

Deliverable D2.2:



To fulfil the objectives defined above, the project posed several questions, which were considered from the viewpoint of the policy makers, transport chains and transhipment points (terminals):

− What cost savings are associated to alternative choices, and what will be the performance in terms of reliability, transit time, etc.?

− How alternative choices, including co‐modality, contribute to sustainable company activities?

− Could benchmarking, in the long term, contribute to the introduction of a common quality label?

Figure 16: BE LOGIC Strategy

• Results

The most important individual result of the project is an e‐tool (online version of the tool is available on the project’s public website) that aims to support a company’s search for potential strategic improvements due to a modal change. The alternatives based on different transportation modes are compared in six main criteria (time, cost, flexibility, reliability, quality and sustainability), giving a percentage difference on each of the criteria. The BE LOGIC tool is based on the judgment of the user, a terminal database containing intermodal services and a calculation tool for emissions.

The output of the project also includes several reports concerning the other issues addressed. The structure of main reports, available on projects public website, is as follows:

− D2.1 Report on overall benchmarking framework

− D2.5 Report on the design and development of the e‐benchmarking tool

Deliverable D2.2:



− D3.1 Logistics market analysis

− D3.2 Factors affecting transport logistics best practices

− D7.1 Report of existing standards in transport logistics


BE LOGIC benchmarking tool is online based e‐tool, provided without charge in project’s website.

• Main benefits

− SMEs, with limited resources and assets but high improvement potential in logistics performance, are able to get insight into the potential gains of reconsidering their logistics choices in costs, performance, quality and environment. This wouldn’t necessarily be possible by applying other methodologies (due, for example, to the implementing costs).

− BE LOGIC develops a methodology to assess transport logistics performance in quantitative terms and applies the benchmark methodology to assess logistics and intermodal policies. Also, it examines existing standards.

− BE LOGIC provides the ability to develop an adequate framework and methodology for market and benchmarking analysis.

− BE LOGIC provides the ability to develop user friendly tool for benchmarking and for identifying the level of adapting the tool among potential users.

Improving logistics quality is one of the project’s objectives that have been taken into account in BE LOGIC Tool. In addition to the quality aspects in benchmarking, the project also examines existing quality standards (e.g. ISO, CEN) for transport logistics and simultaneously considers the need for new quality standards.

The benchmarking of co‐modality options could also have a positive impact on environmental issues including sustainability, which is also one aspect of the Tool.

Even though the Tool didn’t directly address safety or security it still has indirect affect for these aspect as well.


Benchmarking is fairly easy and inexpensive way for SMEs to improve their performance. Also the easiness of on‐line lowers the threshold to adapt the tool. On the other hand, some serious promoting is still probably required to activate potential users.


Not applicable.


Deliverable D2.2:



BE LOGIC provides a benchmark of co‐modality options. The improvement of the quality and efficiency within and across different modes of transport is set to the project’s scope, enabling various stakeholders to efficiently tackle problems in interfaces between the different transits modes and to successfully implement the integration of rail/road and maritime/road in a co‐modal transport environment.

BE LOGIC results in an e‐tool that aims to support a company’s search for potential strategic improvements due to a modal change. Assessment of used logistics performance and improvement of logistics quality through the examination of logistic policies and standards could solve a variety of problems, which, in the Brazilian and Argentinean cases, take the form of:

• Handling the stuffing and stripping of containers in ports.

• Communication and information flow at ports.


• Incipient congestion at border posts.

• Incipient development of logistic zones.

• Nonstandard systems and documents.

3. Further reading

• References

− http://www.be‐logic.info/

− http://www.be‐logic.info/documents/BE_Logic_brochure.pdf

Deliverable D2.2:



4.5. Dangerous Goods 4.5.1. GOOD ROUTE

A. FACT BOX

Title Dangerous Goods Transportation Routing, Monitoring and Enforcement

Programme “Information Society Technology” FP6 Programme (2002‐2006), Thematic Priority: 2.4.12 eSafety‐Cooperative Systems for Road Transport (IST‐4‐027873‐STREP)

Implementation date 01.01.2006‐31.01.2009


A cooperative system for dangerous goods vehicle routing, monitoring, re‐routing (in case of need), enforcement and driver support, based upon dynamic, real time data, aiming to minimise the Societal Risks related to their movements, while still generating the most cost efficient solution for all actors involved.


Several thousands of trucks carrying dangerous goods circulate within European roads on daily basis. They utilise urban roads, rural roads, highways, tunnels and long bridges and, although in some case they are not allowed in some of them, the actual accident risk and impact when using secondary roads or other alternative ways is not calculated. In addition, when, due to unforeseen events (traffic jams, accidents, etc.), they need to change route, they do not have any particular guidance on the safest alternative nor are consequences of road choice to the business chain and societal risk calculated.

In order to address the above, GOOD ROUTE aimed at developing a cooperative system for dangerous goods vehicles routing, monitoring, re‐routing (in case of need), enforcement and driver support, based upon dynamic, real time date, in order to minimise the Societal Risks related to their movements, whereas still generating the most cost efficient solution for all actors involved in their logistic chain.

For this scope, a new classification scheme of the dangerous goods, with infrastructure based safety measures, context of transportation and vehicle characteristic, has been developed, dynamic data collection and fusion have been realised from I2V/V2V sources and a series of on‐board sensors, risk calculation algorithms were realised, leading to a new route guidance function, the “minimum risk route guidance”. The system has been integrated with an automatic, local node based, enforcement functionality and tested in 3 Pilots throughout Europe (in Finland, Switzerland and Italy), with emphasis in densely populated areas, tunnels and bridges. In addition, rerouting info and estimated delays have been communicated to the vehicles logistic chain, thus optimally combining safety with transportation efficiency enhancement.

Key innovations The main innovations within GOOD ROUTE were:

• Development of a decision support system (and algorithms) for dangerous goods vehicles routing and re‐routing, that takes into account dynamic data about the vehicle, the cargo, the infrastructure and the environment; individual risk, societal risk, as well as logistic chain requirements, constraints and equity schemes.

• Integration of this decision support system within an on‐board route guidance system, an infrastructure control operators’ management system and the dangerous goods supply logistic chain

Deliverable D2.2:



intranet.

• Development of an appropriate monitoring and enforcement system, that makes use of all gathered data and provides automatically key enforcement indicators to local enforcement positions.

• Provision of priority to the safety of dangerous good transportation, while taking into account business demands, network efficiency and conflicts resolution.

• Provision of support to dangerous goods drivers through “pushed” (when a traffic or other event requires it) or “pulled” (when they need navigation) services, without the need of communication to a control center (high cost) or a local node (language barriers).

However, the major innovation and impact of GOOD ROUTE was the fact that it aimed at making European infrastructure (roads, tunnels, bridges, etc.) safer by minimum risk, supported and enforced routing / rerouting of dangerous goods vehicles instead of the existent arbitrary and unguided practices.


GOOD ROUTE was a truly multidisciplinary Consortium of 14 Partners. It included all key actors in the field, such as one of the major route guidance manufacturers (PTV), a major telematic systems developer (SIEMENS), a major telecom operator (TID), vehicle manufacturers (CRF, IVECO), 3 major road operators (GST, FINRE, SITAF) with particular infrastructure elements, such as tunnels and bridges; end user representatives (ELPA, an Automobile Club of FIA) and key know‐how providers (CERTH/ITI and HIT, UPM, USTUTT, ICCS and COAT) for user needs, legal and ethical issues. In addition, one of the biggest dangerous goods producers and carriers worldwide, BP, provided a letter of support to the Consortium, opening its proprietary accident database and offering expertise and an invaluable dissemination platform to the project.

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

GOOD ROUTE has approached the aforementioned aim, through its main objectives, which were to:

− Analyse dangerous goods accidents and needs of the dangerous goods companies, transporters, drivers, recipient clients, transport infrastructure owners, authorities, etc., as well as the best practises followed so far, for the specification of an integrated, cost‐efficient, fair and modular system.

− Develop an ontological framework, which will classify and correlate the dangerous cargo, vehicle types and road infrastructure elements, to automatically permit or re‐route specific dangerous good vehicles through specific road infrastructures (i.e. tunnels, long bridges, etc.).

− Develop a collaborative platform, able to gather and process in real time vehicle, cargo and environmental data (road status, unexpected obstacles, weather

Deliverable D2.2:



conditions, population density) as input to an optimal routing and route guidance system.

− Develop a minimum risk guidance system, that is able to route and re‐route dangerous goods vehicles, taking into account individual and societal risk (based upon the collaborative platform based dynamic data), as well as conflict resolution and equity schemes.

− Develop Control Centre algorithms that will deal with movements of all participating dangerous goods vehicles within a certain geographical area, provide the necessary traffic and environmental data to them and inform in real time their logistic chain for any unscheduled re‐routing required.

− Develop an on‐board automatic data retrieval and storage system, to monitor key dangerous goods vehicle parameters (actual vs. planned route, speed, weight per axle, etc.), able to supply it to local nodes (i.e. police car at toll station or before tunnel/bridge, etc.), for enforcement purposes.

− Develop optimal user interfaces for both the drivers of the dangerous goods vehicle and the control centre operators, to provide them with appropriate information and/or warnings, without adversely affecting their workload or causing unnecessary behavioural adaptations.

− Integrate all functions in a prototype vehicle and test them in three Pilot sites, across Europe, to evaluate their reliability, usability, successfulness, cost efficiency and thus estimate their potential safety impact and viability.

− Involve all key actors in the dangerous goods transportation chain, as well as OEMs and sensor suppliers in order to result in a viable business strategy for wide and quick diffusion of the system.

• Results

Common ontological framework (Deliverable D1.1) and system architecture (Deliverable 6.1)

An ontological framework was developed in the project. The main fields of the ontology address the driver, the vehicle, the cargo and the environmental conditions. In the context of these fields, the itineraries, the company data and all significant logistics items have been considered.

GOOD ROUTE aimed at the integration into an advanced route guidance system of real time and dynamic data regarding vehicle, cargo, road and weather status. The core of the system is a real time decision support system (DSS) that optimises the routing of Dangerous Goods Vehicles within a transportation network by balancing the economic costs and societal risks associated with their transport. Transport risks are calculated using the methodology of Probabilistic Risk Analysis applied to the material being transported and a time‐dependent path optimisation algorithm is used for routing. Inputs to the system include the road network, population distribution data, real‐time as well as statistical traffic data and historical accident data. Novel methods were developed for obtaining real time response from the system in spite of the complexity of the associated computations. From an architectural view, the GOOD ROUTE system can be divided into three areas, namely the mobile part (on board unit) the roadside part (local node) and the core part (DSS, data fusion, portal) and the connected external modules (logistics support) as depicted in the following figure. The mobile, roadside and

Deliverable D2.2:



external modules collect data in real time and feed the DSS for producing the optimal minimum risk route.

Figure 17: GOOD ROUTE system architecture

Minimum Risk Route Guidance System (Deliverables 2.2 and 2.1)

The minimal risk route guidance system is a hybrid guidance system, which takes into account static and dynamic data for route optimization. In specific safety critical aspects, infrastructure capacity, risk analysis algorithms, different social and business group demands and conflict resolution between enterprises are taken into account during server side route optimisation. The resulting route is provided to in‐vehicle clients to offer dynamic minimum risk routing and re‐ routing for dangerous good trucks.

OBU (Deliverable 3.2)

The OBU is based in the Blue&Me™ device developed by Fiat Auto, Magneti Marelli and Microsoft Automotive Business Unit, an innovative solution, based on Windows Mobile for Automotive, which performs in‐car communication, information, and entertainment functionalities. Blue&Me includes a voice command system, completely integrated into the vehicle, and an information display. An advanced voice recognition system immediately reads incoming SMS messages aloud.

Control Centre and Logistic chain support modules (Deliverables 4.1 and 4.2)

Web‐frontend and business logic representing an integrated workflow for different stakeholders related to dangerous goods for infrastructure passage planning, prioritisation and monitoring, embedding algorithms making up the Semantics Service Network (SSN) of the logistic support system (LSS) and those that constitute the Data Fusion module of GOOD ROUTE Control Center (CC).

Deliverable D2.2:



The Control Centre is made of a frontend (Portal) and a backend. The backend architecture consists of two modules: the business logic that handles the general tasks like the profile and map management, and the data fusion, that takes care of all the incoming messages and their correct fusion and distribution.

Enforcement System (Deliverable 5.2)

The enforcement module deals with the automatic enforcement on behalf of the Police or the competent authority in case traffic or other type violation is detected, that presupposes the Police involvement in mitigation or at least notification and presence. The system provides an alarm to the enforcement for intervention, taking into consideration the values of key data (vehicle speed, vehicle and driver profile, type and amount of cargo, total weight per axle, etc.), compared to defined thresholds on local, regional (i.e. instantiated per infrastructure) level. The alarm is provided to a local or central checkpoint.

GOOD ROUTE (integrated) vehicle platform (Deliverable 6.3)

GOOD ROUTE vehicle platform is a vehicle platform, equipped with sensors and encompassing OBU, nomadic device interface, local node interface and any other in‐vehicle functionalities required for the overall operation of the GOOD ROUTE system.

GOOD ROUTE integrated system and service (Deliverable 6.2)

GOOD ROUTE integrated system and service is a web service, allowing the full operation of GOOD ROUTE functionality and the relevant nomadic and on‐board devices to connect to it.


Common ontological framework (Deliverable D1.1) and system architecture (Deliverable 6.1)

The GOOD ROUTE ontology has been developed in XML schemas and is open to other systems, in order to be interfaced and interface other existing ontological frameworks related to DG vehicles transportation.

Minimum Risk Route Guidance System (Deliverables 2.2 and 2.1)

The Decision Support System (DSS) is the vital part of the GOOD ROUTE system. It is responsible for calculating the optimum route, which is the lowest‐cost route, the lowest‐risk route, or a combination of the two. It calculates the optimum route for every requested dangerous goods transport by checking for conflicts regarding this route with the Conflict Resolution Module (CRM).

The DSS consists of two parts, the Risk Estimation Module, which calculates the risk related cost that is associated to each segment of the road network, for the particular transport, and the Optimal Route Calculation Module, which produces the optimal route, that is to say the one with the lowest overall combined cost. The former provides the latter with the necessary data to proceed to the calculation.

Deliverable D2.2:



The GOOD ROUTE Decision Support System (DSS) gets input from various sources through the Control Centre. These sources provide either static (i.e. statistical accident data) or real‐time (i.e. weather conditions) data. All these data are used in the calculation of the optimal route.

• Main benefits

GOOD ROUTE is expected to have major strategic impacts in the area of Dangerous Goods transport, through:

− Meeting social demand for acceptable risk levels and safety maximization in the transportation of dangerous goods.

− The creation of a decision support and routing procedure commonly concerted by the very large and very small enterprises, taking into account equity schemes.

− The provision of real time and dynamic data to the dangerous goods logistic chain, thus maximizing the efficiency of transportation and reducing its cost.

− The establishment of a low‐cost and high‐reliability monitoring and enforcement system for dangerous goods vehicles.

− The establishment of pan‐European cooperation in monitoring and controlling dangerous goods movements.

− The reduction of congestion and other problems due to dangerous good vehicles by controlling their numbers and types at any given part of the network at any moment.

− The creation a standardized ontological framework for dangerous goods classification, monitoring and control, that optimizes the use of the network by such goods carrying vehicles, while always, protecting public safety.

− The application guidelines and training schemes developed in its context that will rationalize and optimize dangerous goods transportation.

GOOD ROUTE’s impact is expected to be significant, given that the problem of Dangerous Good’s safe transportation is not a local one, but one that goes beyond national boundaries and requires pan‐European actions, since:

− Only through pan‐European common ontologies can the movement and cargo of such vehicles be monitored and enforced.

− OEMs and sensor/telecom suppliers may provide viably the necessary solutions only within the range of the European Market.

− As the PRESTIGE accident has shown, such catastrophes may happen at any moment, anywhere in Europe and pro‐active action is required to guarantee citizens’ safety and security throughout Europe.

Finally, the close collaboration of OEMs, sensor/telecom providers and operators, Dangerous Goods companies, infrastructure operators and other key stakeholders from 6 EC countries, ranging from North (Finland), to Central (Germany, Switzerland) and South (Spain, Italy, Greece) guaranteed the pan‐European dimension of the project.

Deliverable D2.2:




Strengths:

Minimum Risk Route Guidance

The major innovation and strength of GOOD ROUTE is the fact that calculates the minimum risk route and that, in comparison to existing conventional fleet management systems, which are operating on the basis of the fastest or shortest route. In this way, it is the first time that a system, placed actually in the fleet management segment, does take into consideration the safety aspects of the drivers all road users, as well of the 3rd party population.

Automatic Minimum Risk Rerouting

The minimum risk re‐routing is also enabled through GOOD ROUTE. All conditions (business reasons, traffic jam or accident, weather conditions, other) are automatically identified by the system and the minimum risk re‐routing is directly estimated, according to the rules set behind and acknowledged to all actors of the logistic chain. All the decision and execution burden related to the change of route is taken off the driver, who is assisted with an easy to use navigation system, easily installed in his/her vehicle.

Passport for infrastructure passage

The “passport” for passage function, through several infrastructures, is another major strength of GOOD ROUTE. Time delays, related also to additional costs for the company and the infrastructure, are being averted in this way, whereas the infrastructure achieves to have an overview of its traffic network and manage the transport operation much more efficiently. The same is valid also for the company that is enabled to plan the itineraries of the vehicles in advance and estimate a very close to reality time of arrival to destinations, which enhances the flow of the overall logistic chain.

Enforcement/emergency

Automatic enforcement and emergency support are also considered as strengths of the system. Automatic enforcement comes to replace conventional escorting held in infrastructures nowadays, and to achieve higher level of compliance to the valid in each case regulations. The emergency functionality in specific will allow prompt detection of malfunctions and failures of any type and respective reaction by the corresponding entities. In this way, loss of human lives and large scale damages to the infrastructure are prevented.

GOOD ROUTE Control Centre: an info point for the whole logistic chain

The feasibility of all the above use cases, which require the involvement of all parties related to the transport operation, is achieved through the GOOD ROUTE Control Centre. All actors with different accreditation rights are enabled to monitor the transport operation of the equipped fleets and any changes occurring to that through a portal, which notifies them on the interesting and significant for them events in real‐time. Thus, depending on the emerging situation, quick decisions are made from the side of the infrastructure operators and the companies and prompt reaction is enabled from the

Deliverable D2.2:



respective entities in case of problems. In this way, even customers benefit directly, since they are also authorised to monitor the operation status of their own goods.

Driver always in the loop

The driver, from his/her side, is also enabled in his/her daily tasks, through the navigation client, via which s/he is notified automatically for any changes in his/her route, as well as through the in‐vehicle display, through which s/he is notified for any violations made. The on‐board unit also enables the communication in emergency cases. In this way, the driver is always kept in the loop.

Instantiation of GOOD ROUTE Decision Making according to local rules and stakeholders weighting factors

The local rules imposed by each infrastructure in normal flow constitute the framework, upon which the GOOD ROUTE Decision Support System operates and provides the minimum risk route. A great flexibility of the system is the fact that any change in the local rules or addition of new ones, corresponding to new infrastructures subscribed, is easily followed by change of the framework set behind the decision process of the system. In a similar manner, the weights imposed to each contributing factor for the estimation of the combined minimum risk route can be also modified, depending upon the priorities in each case. Thus, a different weighting system may be applied, following the deployment context of the system, the main actor behind the system the governmental priorities each time, etc.

Common Ontological Framework

The basis for the communication principles in GOOD ROUTE has been set in the ontological framework, developed from its early beginning. The ontological framework is developed in such a way, so as to include, if needed, more attributes corresponding to more parameters (related to vehicle, cargo, transport operation as a whole) as well as to more context of use, beyond road transport. It is open to be interfaced by other ontologies, enabling the connection of GOOD ROUTE to existing systems. It is the main asset of GOOD ROUTE that will allow its wide scale adoption and its compliance to the existing systems, raising in this way its penetration potential and viability.

Compliance with emerging technologies

GOOD ROUTE complies with all relevant to it standards, which strengthens its penetration potential. It is well placed in the context of the European Directives for Dangerous Goods transportation; it complies with C2C, I2C, C2I and TMC standards, security standards, etc.

Benefits for all

GOOD ROUTE constitutes win‐win business proposition to all involved stakeholders. The company, the drivers, the infrastructure, the customers, the enforcement and the emergency units and, above all, the whole society, benefit in terms of safety, comfort and even operational costs.

Deliverable D2.2:



Vast potential for added value services

GOOD ROUTE context may be easily extended in many aspects. The decision making may anticipate more dimensions than the ones already considered (i.e. security, overall environmental safety indices), the telemetric system could include more functionalities (like driver monitoring systems and other Advanced Driver Assistance Systems), more actors, if applicable, could be involved and access the Control Centre, whereas the context of use could be enlarged, including other transportation segments, besides the Dangerous Goods transportation, as well as other transportation modes, besides road transport. The cooperative principles embedded in the system architecture would allow more advanced communication potentials, which have not been demonstrated in the context of GOOD ROUTE, like communication with other vehicles or other infrastructure items (VMS, beacons, V2V, etc.).

Weaknesses:

− Need for instantiation/update of map data

− Missing real time accident and updated population data

− Need for medium to large scale deployment of the system


GOOD ROUTE system was tested both regarding human factors assessment aspects (usability and user acceptance) as well as system performance aspects in three sites, namely the Finnish highways and bridges (DESTIA), the Gotthard tunnel in Switzerland (GST) and the Frejus tunnel in Italy (SITAF). In short, the GOOD ROUTE system has worked fine, although its robustness needs to be further improved, it has been positively rated by all types of actors, although interfaces improvement is still needed prior to its commercialisation, whilst finally the safety and operation efficiency impacts are considerably great.


The GOOD ROUTE project clearly addresses the need for dangerous goods handling systems and tools for the monitoring and routing of dangerous goods.

3. Further reading

• References

− http://www.goodroute‐eu.org/

• Contact info

GOOD ROUTE Coordinator:

Dr. Dimitrios Tzovaras

Centre for Research and Technology Hellas / Informatics and Telematics Institute (CERTH/ITI)

Deliverable D2.2:



1st Km Thermi‐Panorama Road, 57001 Thermi, Greece

Tel.: +30‐2310‐487515

Fax: +30‐2310‐464164


http://www.iti.gr

GOOD ROUTE Technical Manager:

Dr. Evangelos Bekiaris

Research Director

Centre for Research and Technology Hellas/ Hellenic Institute of Transport

6th km. Charilaou‐ Thermi Road

57001 Thermi

Greece

Tel. +30‐2310‐498265

Fax. +30‐2310‐498269

Athens office:

17 Posidonos Av.

17455 Alimos

Greece

Tel. +30‐210‐9853194

Fax. +30‐210‐9853193


http://www.hit.certh.gr

Deliverable D2.2:



4.6. Container management 4.6.1. CHINOS

A. FACT BOX

Title Container Handling in Intermodal Nodes Optimal and Secure




Ready‐to‐the‐market IT tools (Automatic Container Identification Unit, Damage Documentation System, Communication Controller(s), Chain Event Manager) as well as technical and organizational recommendations.


• Commercial: how to cope with continuous rising cargo volumes that need to be handled.

• Legal/Security: how to deal with new security rules and regulations for fighting against terrorism and the change of responsibilities in the chain.

• Technical: how to best integrate technologies such as RFID transponders for container identification and electronic seals combining the benefits of classical bolt seals with RFID capabilities.

Key innovations Processes can be optimised and accelerated tremendously by using automatic identification and condition checks with contact free reading possibilities (container RFID tags, electronic seals, optical checks) without requiring human intervention. This combination of commercial and security issues in one approach makes CHINOS quite unique.


• Institut für Seeverkehrswirtschaft und Logistik

• DBH

• National Technical University of Athens

• Thessaloniki Port Authority

• Information to Digital Media

• TRICON

• TEAMLINES

• T ‐ SYSTEMS

• POLZUG

• EUROGATE

• CARGO CENTER GRAZ

• North Sea Terminal Bremerhaven Gmbh.

• GAC Shipping S.A Thessaloniki

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

Deliverable D2.2:



Operators of container terminals (sea ports, inland ports, freight villages, rail/road intermodal terminals) and transports are currently facing several challenges that put additional burden on them but at the same time they offer potentials for process optimisation.

Drivers of the project can be divided into three categories:

− Commercial: how to cope with continuous rising cargo volumes to be handled

− Legal/Security: how to deal with new security rules and regulations for fighting against terrorism and the change of responsibilities in the chain

− Technical: how to best integrate technologies such as RFID transponders for container identification and electronic seals combining the benefits of classical bolt seals with RFID capabilities.

CHINOS supports operators to exploit the above mentioned challenges in the best possible way by employing innovative IT technology solutions. This refers to the optimization and acceleration of processes by using automatic identification and condition checks without requiring human intervention. The project also aims at combining commercial and security issues.

• Results

The approach foresaw the software development of two main components: 1) automatic container identification unit and 2) damage documentation system. Furthermore, the system is comprised of Communication Controllers, Chain Event Manager, RFID tags and electronic seals.

Figure 18: Principal CHINOS components


Output of the project contains ready‐to‐the‐market IT tools:

Deliverable D2.2:



− Automatic Container Identification Unit

− Damage Documentation System

− Communication Controllers

− Chain Event Manager

Also the technical and organisational recommendations concerning efficient exploitation of these new technologies were prepared.

• Main benefits

By applying CHINOS, the terminal operators are able to optimize their storage space and to enhance the integration of transport modes along intermodal logistics chains by re‐designing the procedures at their interfaces.

The full benefit from new technologies can be exploited only if the total integration of (re‐engineered) business processes and IT systems is achieved. CHINOS put a special focus on this integration work and the validation at several European locations (i.e. in the ports of Bremerhaven, Thessaloniki, the Graz freight village and a railway station of the Polzug network).

One of the project’s drivers was security orientated. Developed IT solutions can promote safety and security aspects by improving damage documentation and tracking abilities.

Processes can be more optimized and efficient due to the usage of automatic identification and condition checks without requiring human intervention. This is also assumed to have positive reflection to smaller number of errors made, which eventually improves the quality of services.

Environment wise, damage documentation may have indirect impact on avoiding environmental damages.


No information available




The CHINOS project addresses the Brazilian and Argentinean barriers and thresholds through the following pillars:

• Automatic identification and condition checks through RFID transponders, electronic seals and optical checks lead to optimization and acceleration of processes in road international transport and to seamless communication and information flows at ports.

• CHINOS project enhances the integration of transport modes along intermodal logistics chain by re‐designing the procedures at their interfaces. This way, the application of CHINOS can meet the need for reinforcing the shipping transport –

Deliverable D2.2:



the basic player in the containers transport chain. Operation of warehousing areas and parking lots in the rail/port interface and rail access to main container ports is also set into the scope.

• CHINOS offers potentials for optimising containers logistics, leading to a better handling of stuffing and stripping of containers in ports and optimization of storage spaces.

• CHINOS combines security with commerciality. Software development of a damage documentation system and improvement of tracking abilities provides adequate operational safety and addresses the issue of port security concern to operators of port terminals.

3. Further reading

• References

− CHINOS flyer (http://www.chinos‐rfid.eu/docs/public/CHINOS%20flyer.pdf)

− CHINOS website (http://www.chinos‐rfid.eu/)

4.6.2. VIT Metrocargo

A. FACT BOX

Title Computer vision technologies for METROCARGO: An innovative system for intermodal shipment of containers and swap bodies.

Programme 7th Framework Programme, SP4‐Capacities – Research for SMEs



The VIT research project was developed to provide the required complements to the Metrocargo technology (described briefly below). The VIT project gave the small enterprises (SME) participants the needed know‐how and prototypes on the below topics:

• A vision system for container automatic load/unload.

• An innovative prototype of a low‐cost 2D visual module to scan the train composition.

• A video‐surveillance system to monitor automatic operation areas where personnel should not enter.

• A software predicting the effect on overall system performance depending on errors and failures of the vision devices and software.


Regarding the current railroad system, the shipment of containers is limited to point‐to‐point trains, without the possibility of loading and unloading at intermediate stops. The vertical load and unload of the wagons with gantry cranes or similar equipment, does not allow a “network” use of the railway, but rather a rigid connection between two points. The intermodal transport, to and from the ports, is carried out only with full trains towards few destinations. The loading/unloading operations require 8 to 12 hours and cost between € 700 and € 1,000 per train and this is why all transfer and collection of load units in

Deliverable D2.2:



between nodes within the origin‐destination chain, is not cost‐ or time‐operable.

To meet the European challenges of intermodality (as depicted in the EU White Paper: “European Transport Policy for 2010: Time to Decide” 2001), the Metrocargo business project was introduced in 2004, as a technical solution to all the above issues. The Metrocargo system is a smart Electro‐mechanic system that allows charging and discharging containers from a train only in a few minutes. The system is adaptable to any kind of train and container type with no need of modifications to neither the wagons nor the containers. The Metrocargo system applies to cargo the same concept used for passengers, setting‐up a network of shuttle trains that run on a fixed time plan.

The VIT project initiated in order to finalize the design of the Metrocargo equipment by providing designing vision functionalities which will assure precise handling, verification of the train composition, safety and security.

Key innovations The VIT project provides non invasive 3D reconstruction techniques at the basis of automatic control functionalities and ad hoc video‐surveillance methods at the basis of human safety.


The project was structured with a number of SMEs and researchers (RTD performers) forming a Consortium to do development and research work for the industrial project of Metrocargo.

SMEs

- ILog ‐ Genova, Italy (ILOG)

- Molinari Rail AG ‐ Wiensendangen, Switzerland (MOL)

- WITT Industrie Elektronik – Berlin, Germany (WITT)

- Systems Navigator – The Hague, The Netherlands (SYS)

RTD performers

- Università di Genova ‐ DISI, Genova, Italy (DISI)

- Speed Poland Automation & Logistics Sp z.o.o. – Wrocław, Poland (SPE)

- SAT Simulations und Automations Technologie AG – Freiburg, Germany (SAT)

- Imavis Srl – Bologna, Italy (IMA)

- Dundee University – Dundee, UK (DUN)

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

The VIT projects aimed at developing innovative technologies for the automatic and secure handling of containers and swap bodies for intermodal shipment. The technology applied was primarily functional to the Metrocargo technology, though its value could be attractive for the general market as well. The specific problems that VIT addresses, concern:

Deliverable D2.2:



- the visual identification of the containers corner fittings where the loading equipment needs to operate;

- the general safety and security of containers operations within an intermodal terminal.

Full automation along the loading/unloading container process (without human intervention) was set on the project’s focus, which guaranteed the processing speed required to make the loading system practically viable and economically sound.

• Results

As mentioned before the VIT project resulted in the above four elements:

- A vision system for container automatic load/unload. This provides rapid and very accurate information on the precise positioning of corner fittings of the container to be handled, so that the lifting units that area part of the Metrocargo plant can insert a pin in the side slot and lift the container.

- An innovative prototype of a lowcost 2D visual module to scan the train composition. The train load plan, with the property codes of each container, is supplied prior to train arrival, but, as all things human, might contain mistakes. The visual system developed in VIT, computes the sequence of containers loaded on the train and reads their code numbers as the train is entering or leaving the station, sending feedbacks in case of discrepancy with the load plan or when the writings are so damaged that the system cannot read them.

- A videosurveillance system to monitor automatic operation areas where personnel should not enter. Metrocargo is fully automated and no person must enter the work area; in addition to the usual precautions to avoid such event, a visual system that detects accurately the presence of humans (disregarding other moving objects) and gives a signal that can automatically stop all machinery in the concerned area, thus assuring both safety and security of the plant, was developed.

- A software predicting the effect on overall system performance depending on errors and failures of the vision devices and software. The possibility of errors and failures by each vision system were evaluated and used to predict the overall performance of the system. To this purpose a simulation tools allowing the evaluation and analysis of the risk connected with the information coming from vision systems, was implemented, in order to manage the plant in safe conditions and guarantee a correct operability of the intermodal terminal.

The main research and technology contributions of the VIT project are:

- Study, design, and development of a robust and redundant vision system for precise relative positioning of loading equipment and containers/wagons in order to load and unload the train with a significant decrease of human intervention.

- Study, design, and development of vision functionalities to check the correct loading of the train before departure according to safety regulations.

- Study and prototyping of an innovative visual 2D scan of the train composition, in terms of the containers on board, after arrival and before departure.

- Study, design, and development of a state‐of‐the‐art video‐surveillance system appropriately designed to monitor sensible areas and off‐limits zones for humans.

Deliverable D2.2:



- Design and engineering of a system security infrastructure to detect and solve possible system failures.



• Main benefits

Through the support of the Metrocargo system, VIT can produce the following benefits:

- Move high volumes of freight traffic from road to rail.

- Form an integrated system using ships and trains for long range transport, and trucks for door delivery and pick up.

- Reduce pollution owing to reduced transport by truck on medium and long distance.

- Reduce the overall logistic costs owing to greater efficiency.

- Effect fast connections between ports and dry‐ports.

- Provide fast cargo transport.

- Provide flexibility and progressive development through modular construction.

- Enable low investments.

- Reduce the spaces required.

- Add safety on road traffic.




The results of the VIT project were incorporated in a full scale section of Metrocargo plant that was developed for demonstration outside VIT and installed in the port area of Vado Ligure, Italy. The plant, complemented by the devices and prototypes developed within VIT, succeeded in becoming fully operational.


The VIT project, through the technological and research support of the Metrocargo project, can support an intermodal transport network with fast cargo transport, flexibility, limited required space, cost reduction over existing system, no limits about destination, reduced environmental impact and added safety of road traffic – since it cuts down the number of trucks running on highways.

High volumes of freight traffic can be moved from road to rail, using the existing railroad network and an innovative way of loading containers on rail car horizontally. Hence, use of rail could be intensified through the stimulation of road and rail integration.

Deliverable D2.2:



The space required for the loading/uploading of container is limited, thus reducing the needs of warehousing areas and parking slots both in port and railway terminals (the device that allows loading cargo units on train cars can be used while trains are standing in station under the electric feeding line).

3. Further reading

• References

− VIT project website (http://www.vitproject.eu/)

− http://cordis.europa.eu/search/index.cfm?fuseaction=proj.document&PJ_LANG=EN&PJ_RCN=10233749&pid=0&q=545D8900A7BC1747957009CD1E2CCCF9&type=adv

4.6.3. COSMA

A. FACT BOX

Title COSMA

Programme

Implementation date 2004 – 2010


Software system to support the user for fulfilling his daily container terminal management tasks.


Most of the software systems for container terminal management tasks are generally intended to be used by large container terminals not by small and medium‐sized enterprises. A large amount of the functions contained by such systems are not needed by smaller terminals due to different modes of operation. In addition the price for such large systems often exceeds the budgets for most of the rather small companies operating smaller terminals. On the other hand smaller container terminals often have special workflows which are not covered by the large software systems.

The aim of the COSMA software system is to support the user for fulfilling his daily container terminal management tasks. COSMA is focused on the container surface transport from the view and needs of a multimodal container terminal.

The system is able to handle transports of the following modes:

• Rail

• Road

• Vessel (Inland Navigation, Deep Sea, Short Sea Shipping)

Key innovations Software system for the daily container management.



Deliverable D2.2:



B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

The software aimed at:

- Supporting the daily tasks at container management.

- Providing transparency of each working process.

- Providing the ability to work on modern intermodal container terminal.

Secondarily, the project aimed at:

- A state‐of‐the‐art, easy to use graphical users interface.

- Multiple views on the same data: detailed and summarised views in tabular and graphical display.

- The strict use of user‐defined master data on a maximum level to avoid misspelled or ambiguous inputs.

- Sophisticated reporting functionality which can be altered by the user himself.

- Flexible import and export functionality for the data exchange with other business partners any time.

- Three‐Dimensional visualisation with zoom functions of the container yard and the stocking area with actual data.

• Results

The above figure shows how the whole system is built and which modules are integrated.

Figure 19: COSMA system functions

Deliverable D2.2:



COSMA Kernel This basic part consists of the following modules: - The main element of the COSMA system is the access to a relational database containing all information needed to perform all subsequent functions.

- Functionality to work with master data. - User management and configuration. - Additional functionality to control an automatic crane. Container Management This part contains different modules to create and modify the actual stock of containers. This is performed by multiple booking functions for in‐ and outgoing containers, transhipments, abilities for corrections and sending and receiving notifications (advises).

- For an enhanced transport planning users may send notifications in advance for single transports and containers. If available, external data can be imported. Otherwise, the data has to be entered manually. Those containers are not really moved into or out of the yard, but entered as data records into the system, resulting in two advantages:

- Advanced planning of such containers

- Speeds up booking if the container is really moved.

- The booking of incoming, outgoing or internal moved containers. Normally this is done by manual input. When using the additional functionality for the fully automated crane, this add‐on may take over the booking partly or completely.

- In a minority of cases some kind of correction of inaccurate booked data records might be necessary (at manually booked or electronically notified bookings). Especially when working with fully automated equipment this may be a critical task, hence a separate module may be necessary.

Overview of Operative Processes The second group of functions implemented is related to evaluations of the operation processes. - Getting information about the moves of containers. The following reports are implemented: - Quantity of containers been moved in a specific period. - Quantity of a single container moved in a specific period. - The storage period of a specific container on the yard in a specific period.

- Getting information about the state of a single container.

- Booking information - Location and condition

- Showing information about the yard.

- Structure of the container stock - (Single container is stored on storing position)

Warehouse Management Creating and configuring the physical container yard mapping to the COSMA system is the main focus of the third group of functions.

Deliverable D2.2:



- Create the map of the physical container yard into the database structure of the COSMA system.

- Configure each stack (even on row or slot base, if needed) with attributes to allow a sophisticated strategy for the container storage, especially when working with full automated equipment.

- For a quick and detailed overview about the actual state of the whole container yard, a three‐dimensional view is implemented in the COSMA system. Users are able to view each stack, each container on the yard with a few mouse clicks and moves. A click on a single container shows up its actual booking information.

After finishing the first version of COSMA successfully, the demand for a fully automated crane control being used with this system emerged by one of the customers. This request was integrated into the software system and is in full operation today.


COSMA uses a conventional type of client‐server‐application. Such applications use a centralised database which is installed on the database server. Users work at their workstations and have access to the database. In order to keep maintenance cost low, standardised products are used (ex. Microsoft Windows operating system on workstations, a relational SQLdatabase which can be installed on multiple Database Server Brands (ex. Oracle, Sybase, MySQL). Database Connections are based on standardised TCP/IP Protocol. With today’s advanced technology multiple connections via private and public networks (ex. the internet) are feasible as well as mobile computing using java and a cellular phone. The data integrity and security can always be maintained.

• Main benefits

The main benefits derived from the application of the COSMA container management system are listed below:

- A Uniform proceeding is used in each booking mode.

- The ability to work with external data is implemented.

- A sophisticated container storage strategy reduces costs due to reduction of unnecessary moves.

- This system increases the complete yard utilization and the handling speed.

By summarizing all aforementioned benefits, this system results in increased productivity.


Strengths:

The described modular concept and implementation allows a comparatively straightforward adaptation of future requirements for other interested parties and current users. This concept enables each new customer to choose needed functionalities to be integrated and to exclude those not needed.

Deliverable D2.2:



This concept includes the ability to offer off‐the‐shelf software and individual customisation. The developing company also offers advisory services to plan, integrate and extend the software system.

The optimal design of the user interface is achieved by involving all users who would work with the software.

Another critical success factor is the infrastructure of the computer system since the new software has to run on existing hardware satisfactorily:

‐ The bandwidth of data exchange can not be exceeded enormously.

‐ Visualisations have to fit existing monitors.

‐ Processing of data has to be performed on existing computers

Weaknesses

One problem to establish a system like COSMA (for the intended use as a fully integrated yard management system, not just as a simple container booking system) is the fact that the system needs a yard being physically structured in a pre‐assigned way.

In contrast to large deep‐sea container terminals with long‐term contracts with global operating shipowners, where the kind of business forces a strictly defined structure (they mostly handle containers only, but this in a fast and efficient way), smaller terminals often do not have such pre‐defined structures. Containers as well as other loads (Project Cargo with unpredictable sizes and handling possibilities) are handled and the movements are often not as time‐critical.

Loads being handled apart from containers rarely have the same sizes (except for semi‐trailers for example) , so – even when a structure is defined to store containers – if a usual operator needs to place an ‘unusual’ object, it will be placed wherever the space needed is available.

This mode of operation creates conflicts in a system, which usually relies on a retained and well conceived physical structure, to be accepted by a terminal operator. COSMA was developed with this barrier well in mind. Some kind of physical structure has to be maintained otherwise the storage will end up in a chaos.

The software system has to be easy to work with the pre‐defined structure, it should be kept flexible instead of setting too much limits to the user and should enable growth of the terminal of many kinds.


Not applicable


COSMA provides a flexible import and export functionality for the data exchange, thus effectively dealing with problems of communication and information flow.

The availability of a 3D visualization of the container yard, and of each container in it, provides adequate operational safety, thus, dealing with issues of port security concerning the operations of port terminals.

Deliverable D2.2:



The ability to modify the actual stock of containers (by multiple booking functions for in‐ and outgoing containers, transhipments, etc.) can successfully address issues such as:

- High needs for warehousing areas.

- Lack of storage containers.

- Lack of points of primary and secondary storage nodes.

It can also meet the needs for:

- Better handling of the stuffing and stripping of containers in ports.

- Optimized coordination proceedings for receiving and delivery of container in terminals.

3. Further reading

• References

− PROMIT project deliverable D3.3: http://www.promit‐project.net/UploadedFiles/Deliverables/PROMIT_BPH3_April09_cp_MSR.pdf

• Contact info:

Mr. Marcus Engler

ISL

Tel.: +49/4 21/2 20 96‐0,

E‐mail: [email protected] / [email protected]

Deliverable D2.2:



4.7. Border crossing operations management 4.7.1. INTERFACE

A. FACT BOX

Title Improvement of iNtermodal TERminal Freight operations At border Crossing tErminal)

Programme 5th Framework Programme – “Competitive and Sustainable Growth”

Implementation date October 2002 – September 2005


Recommendations, guide of techniques best use and implementation plan regarding the optimization of border crossing procedures, for all the decision making levels (macro and micro) and for the different intervention domains of the logistic chain (suppliers, users, service providers and policy makers).


Intermodal Freight Terminals (IFT) or transfer points are places equipped for the transhipment and storage of Intermodal Transport Units (ITU). They connect at least two transport modes, which usually are road and rail, although waterborne (sea and inland waterways) and air transport can also be integrated. It is possible to find terminal companies and bodies handling both freight transport (eg. freight forwarders, shippers, transport operators, customs) and accompanying services (eg. storage, maintenance and repair). In this case IFT are also referred to as logistic centres or freight villages.

Terminals represent the nodal points of the intermodal transport network and their efficiency significantly affects the entire intermodal freight transport chain. Efficient intermodal transport requires infrastructure planners and managers across Europe to co‐operate in establishing coherent networks of efficient transfer points, which are the weakest links in the current intermodal transport system and a major generator of friction costs generated through many factors, namely:

- Lack of a coherent network of modes and interconnections between the modes in a number of high density corridors in Europe.

- Inadequate access by rail, road or waterborne transport to existing transfer points, which can hamper the integration of these modes and transfer between modes.

- Lack or inadequacy of interoperability between modes and loading units. In fact, dealing with a variety of loading unit dimensions and different standards for transport means and infrastructure (often regulated differently by country and by mode) lowers the levels of interoperability between different modes, and produces congestion and inefficiencies at terminals.

- Present‐day terminals, which are usually marked by a combination of heavy engineering and manual processes, are not managed efficiently with appropriate ICT technologies.

The absence of a systematic network for data interchange along the entire intermodal transport chain is a source of high costs and service deficiencies. Existing modal‐based information transmission systems require users to re‐enter similar data at each interface. The implementation of generalised systems for electronic communication between the different partners in the intermodal chain would mean that

Deliverable D2.2:



there was the opportunity to change operations at short notice along the journey. The absence of systems enabling tracking and tracing during the whole journey across modes, does not allow for a quick detection of errors and false routings.

Key innovations


The partners involved in the project are listed below:

• Intermodale Expertengruppe Herry + IPE + IC (HERRY); Österreichische Bundesbahnen (OBB), Austria

• Centrum Dopravního Vyzkumu (CDV); Ceské DráhyS.O. (CD), Czech Republic

• Technical Research Centre of Finland (VTT); VR Ltd Finnish Railways (VR), Finland

• Network of European Transport Researchers (NETR), France • TECNIC Consulting Engineers S.p.A. (TECNIC); Università degli Studi

di Roma “La Sapienza” (DITS); Combined European Management and Transportation S.p.A. (CEMAT); Centro Interportuale Merci S.p.A. (CIM), Italy

• Madrid Polytechnical University (UPM); Red Nacional de Ferrocarriles Españoles (RENFE), Spain

• TFK Transport Research Institute (TFK), Sweden • École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Switzerland

B. DESCRIPTION

1. Project details

• Aims

INTERFACE aimed at providing innovative solutions for the improvement of borders crossings terminals operations both between EU and Accession Countries (CEECs) and inside EU (France‐Spain, alpine crossing). The main goal was to reduce customs waiting time, increase safety, harmonise regulations and develop additional functions to accommodate certain border crossing terminals (such as regroupment, customs clearance, etc.). Identification and testing of the proposed solutions were made in a real environment in three demonstration sites. INTERFACE focused not only on isolated solutions but also on combined solutions stressing their potential at different levels (technical, economical, organisational, etc.). The project had for geographical frame the main European economical poles and high potential traffic corridors in order to make possible the adoption of demonstrated intermodal solutions to other sites.

• Results

The INTERFACE Workplan was oriented around seven dynamic activities’ platforms:

1. Analysis of the state of the art (Problems Definition and General Overview). 2. Case studies. 3. Identification of intermodal solutions (methodology).

Deliverable D2.2:



4. Scenario analysis. 5. Demonstrations in real environment and validation of the analysed solutions. 6. Provision of guidelines and recommendations. 7. Results and dissemination.

The general results and conclusions are summarised as follows:

• The survey conducted on the border crossing terminals allowed the classification of the terminals in two families: technical (related to a network approach of the terminal) and techno‐commercial (related to a market approach of the terminal).

• The analysis of the factors nature (technical, operational, commercial, legal, etc.) and their weight at different terminal interfaces, concluded in identifying the main factors influencing the operational performance.

• Regardless of the terminal profile, significant reductions in operational efficiency are mainly caused by one or more constraints, such as technical, operational, infrastructural, administrative and documentary.

• Reduction of total transport time is translated to reduction of the whole transport costs.

• Bottlenecks due to border crossing operations and lack of rail line capacity prevent trains punctuality and/or delay recovering. Development of alternative paths and re‐scheduling decisions arose as a directional priority towards an integrated, “passenger‐oriented” timetable planning.

• Inspection procedures are usually based on visual check and staff expertise. The installation of equipment such as weighbridges, brake test system, tank wagons liquid level measurements and radioactive detectors, can reduce inspection time, increase the reliability and accuracy of the inspections and improve operational safety both at terminal level and in trains circulation.



• Main benefits

The main benefits derived from the demonstrators are listed below:

Demonstrator 1:

- High quality in information interchange between transport operators intermodal transport and provision of operational/commercial data to the operators.

- Increase of the pre‐advices reliability. - Decrease of stop‐over times at borders. - Decrease of border waiting times. - Decrease to the time due to commercial inspections. - Increase in the intermodal trains punctuality. - Increase of productivity with decrease of the stuff.

Demonstrator 2:

Deliverable D2.2:



- Elaboration of computerized transhipment plans with automatic checking and alerts related to the loading errors.

- Integration of productive information on the wagon. - Decrease of time due to transhipment planning and train control. - Increase of productivity with decrease of the stuff.

Demonstrator 3:

- Decrease of the duration of the train composition. - Increase of the work time rate of the process. - Increase of productivity with decrease of the stuff.

Some general conclusions are presented as follows:

- From the railway operator’s point of view, it is more efficient to invest in data interoperability projects, than in “hardware”.

- The project has an impact on all freight trains (not only on intermodal ones) crossing the AT‐CZ border ‐ this could be seen as additional benefit of this integrated approach.

- For further improvement concerning the border stops the accompanying implementation of confidence agreements on technical inspections will be necessary.


Strengths: The technical solutions of the project present a high level of transferability, independency concerning geographical area and conditions and interoperability. They allow an overcoming of the technical and operational barriers, while they are based on theoretical case studies. The efficiency of dedicated solutions was evaluated in real environment, by companies representing a large part of Europe by its transnationality.

Weaknesses:

The projects solutions depend on willingness of many parties involved. Too many parties involved imply risks of no acceptance by some of them, risks of difficulties in communicating among partners and risks of different expectations.


The concepts developed and theoretically assessed within the research phase of the project have been tested, in a real environment through three “demonstrators”, in order to check the transferability of the results to other conditions and to define pre‐conditions and supporting measures for the breakthrough. These demonstrators were:

1. Demonstrator 1 ‐ Border crossing between Austria and Czech Republic (Breclav – Hohenau). Breclav (Czech Republic) – Hohenau (Austria) is the most important railway border crossing point between these two countries. The demonstrator tested the improvement of intermodal management procedures aiming to storing and delivering, to the end users, real time information on freight status and location at reference network of Breclav terminal.

2. Demonstrator 2 ‐ Border crossing between Spain and France (Port Bou). One of the two usable rail border crossings on the French‐Spanish border is Cerbere – Port Bou in the Mediterranean (East side) corridor. This demonstrator dealt

Deliverable D2.2:



with the application of dedicated solutions aiming to apply new logistic concepts at Port Bou terminal. Taking into account infrastructural constraints (different track gauge between the two countries) and network constraints (maximum freight train length), the only way to optimize transit time was through improvement of transhipment plan and operational processes at the terminal. The impacts of these concepts have been assessed in terms of reduction of ratio of transhipment time to total transit time.

3. Demonstrator 3 ‐ Border between Italy and Switzerland (Novara). The demonstration has concerned the Novara CIM intermodal terminal and the international lines linking it with the North of Europe (Novara – Domodossola via Borgomanero, Novara – Domodossola via Arona, Novara – Luino via Sesto Calende), including the relevant border stations (Domodossola, Luino). The main goal of this demonstrator was to test new solutions about network and terminal interoperability. Infrastructural improvements were expected in Novara terminal, so flexibility in train and terminal operations as well as a better information exchange between border station and terminal became suitable tools to allow the network to feed new terminal capacity. The impacts of these concepts have been assessed in terms of potential costs and time saving as well as users’ acceptance.

Each demonstrator has been set up using the following steps:

i. Ex‐ante indicators evaluation.

ii. Dedicated solutions simulation.

iii. Ex‐post indicators evaluation.

Due to the complexity of the logistic chains in which the demonstrators were located, their implementation has been preceded by a “pilot test” to define the Actors’ responsibilities and the operational timing.


The project’s technical solutions can be highly adaptable to the target areas of Argentina and Brazil, as long as these areas present similar characteristics with the areas of the demonstrators. A suitable adjustment of the project’s tools in the target areas, in multifaceted levels (technical, legislative, etc.), can easily address all the key barriers and obstacles at border crossing, even those at an institutional and regulatory level. For example, better and more reliable information flows can address the need for adequate operational safety; decrease of border waiting times and flexibility in train and terminal operations tackles the issues of incipient congestion at border posts; improvement of transhipment plan and operational processes can reduce the needs for warehousing space and parking.

3. Further reading

• References:


Deliverable D2.2:



- http://www.transport‐research.info/web/projects/project_details.cfm?id=7636

• Contact info:

Mr. Paolo Gasperini TECNIC Consulting Engineers S.p.A.

Email: p.gasperini@tecnic‐spa.it

Tel: +39 06 85355088

Deliverable D2.2:



5. ANALYSIS 5.1. Introduction Since the beginning of the 90’s, a vast amount of research has been financed by the EU, resulting in the configuration of an important “library” of European best practices, including a plenitude of R&D programs concerning freight transport.

The procedure of identifying and selecting the European research innovations and emerging ideas for the needs of the current deliverable was implemented by having as starting point the key barriers, thresholds and needs of the intermodal freight transport system in the target countries of Argentina and Brazil, as well as the conference outcomes. A very small percentage of the whole European research was selected and presented, which best responds to the current situation of freight transport in the target areas. It is to say that, in general, there was a high degree of difficulty in identifying within the vast EU research projects those who best address the specific Argentinean and Brazilian needs and thresholds. A thorough review was conducted which resulted in the EU projects presented in Chapter 4. Some of them have a rather “ring” coverage regarding the target areas, while others are more focused on the exact LA barriers and needs. In any case, a specification of each research project within each case study will be the result of technical activities to follow in the next phase of the ENABLE project.

5.2. Description of research projects and further analysis

In order to simplify the understanding and the use of the European research innovations a thematic clustering has been applied into seven thematic areas. These are depicted in the table to follow, along with the research projects included in each one of them and the main aspects to be applied in Latin America (LA).

Table 3: General aspects of research innovations to be applied in LA

Thematic area Project Acronym Main aspects to be applied in LA

Long door‐to‐door transport chains

D2D, SMART‐CM, e‐Freight

Facilitating intercontinental freight transport flows by using advanced technologies.

Intelligent technologies EURIDICE, GIFTS, Parcelcall, M‐Trade

Cargo inspection and control through ICT technologies.

Standardization FREIGHTWISE Standardization and harmonization of intermodal freight transport procedures.

E‐Logistics KOMODA, BestLog, BE LOGIC

Optimization of logistics chain within the scope of co‐modality.

Dangerous goods GOOD ROUTE Systems for dangerous goods vehicle routing, monitoring, enforcements and driver support.

Deliverable D2.2:



Container management Chinos, VIT, COSMA ICT technologies and smart equipment for container handling.

Border crossing operations management INTERFACE

Measures for the improvement of the efficiency and effectiveness of border crossing operations.

Identified and chosen research projects, their specific goals and key results, the exact Argentinean and Brazilian barriers to which they are addressed and the key challenges for their transferability to the target areas are given in the following table. The issue of the projects’ transferability is dealt only at an abstract level. The issues which have to be dealt in the actual procedure of a research project’s transferability in a specific area demand a thorough review, investigation and analysis in a multifaceted level (technical, economical, legislative, etc.), that will be carried out in the next stage of the project.

Deliverable D2.2: Freight Transport Innovations List


Table 4: Identified research projects and their provisional transferability approach

Research project

Thematic area

Goals Key results LA Barriers and needs Transferability

D2D Long door‐to‐door transport chains

To build and use integrated management and communication systems for door‐to‐door intermodal transport chains, enhanced with smart technologies and equipment.

D2D Software Solution Prototype which combines: • A transport chain management system

• A monitoring system • A communication platform.

• Possibility to develop a management system to allow for shared infrastructure use of different cargo operators.

• Shipping is not competitive enough with the road system.

• Reliability and visibility of waterways would require tracking systems for cargo status and position.

• Much of the operation in stuffing and stripping of containers is in port, which hinders the operation modes, facilitated by the unitization of cargo.

• Weak coordination procedures for receiving and delivery of container terminals in exports. Potential for technology applied to customs controls and procedures.

• Problems of communication and information flow at ports.

• Incipient congestion at border posts. • Lack of harmonization of control services and support provided by organizations involved in the operations of customs control.

The D2D Software Solution Prototype is transferable to LA countries through: • Identification of local stakeholders from transportation industry.

• Identification of existing information systems and examination of their compatibility with the proposed “smart” technologies and equipment. Also, assess the functional sufficiency of existing technological infrastructure.

• Identification of the existing legacy systems and examination of their interoperability with commercial information providers.

• Training and human resource management recommendations regarding the use of the new technology. Also, establishment of synergies with EU organizations.

Deliverable D2.2:



SMARTCM Long door‐to‐door transport chains

To develop, test and demonstrate “single window” interoperability architecture for container supply chain management.

• “Interoperable Single Window platform solution” for monitoring the container security status.

• “Neutral information administering organization” for managing the platform.

• “Industry Added Value creation” on the basis of the information, the technology and the trusted environment.

• Excessive bureaucracy in international transport.



• Lack of storage containers. • Issue of port security concern to operators of port terminals, especially in relation to additional costs and their impact on competitiveness.


• Lack of adequate operational safety. • Incipient congestion at border posts. • Nonstandard systems and documents. • Lack of harmonization of control services and support provided by organizations involved in the operations of customs control.

The project may be transferred to LA countries by: • Identifying the different types of actors involved and creating solid partnerships between them.

• Identifying existing hardware and software equipment and assessing its compatibility and interoperability to the proposed ones. Generally, assess existing technology functionality.

• Identifying existing business, management and operational structures in the door‐to‐door transport of containers.

• Providing training and human resource management recommendations regarding the use of the new technology. Training of the personnel involved in the planning, as well as monitoring and controlling operations is necessary, along with establishment of synergies with EU organizations.

• Identifying/establishing a ‘neutral information administering organization’ to manage the platform and guaranty data integrity.

Deliverable D2.2:



eFreight Long door‐to‐door transport chains

To formulate a standard framework for freight information exchange, to develop a Single European Transport Document, to establish: i) a Single Window (single access point) and one stop shopping for administrative procedures in all modes, ii) simple, harmonised border crossings procedures iii) simple procedures and necessary infrastructure for secure and efficient transport corridors between Europe, USA, and Asia.

• Internet‐based e‐Freight platform (ICT platform) for e‐Freight Solutions

• A2A and A2B solutions for co‐modal.

• B2B and B2A solutions for co‐modal transport management.

• Roadmap for the adoption of e‐Freight solutions.


• Intensify use rail to stimulate the rail and road integration.


• Issue of port security concern to operators of port terminals, especially in relation to additional costs and their impact on competitiveness.


• Lack of adequate operational safety. • Incipient congestion at border posts. • Non standard systems and documents. • Lack of harmonization of control services and support provided by organizations involved in the operations of customs control.

Transferability to the target areas can be achieved through: • Identification of local stakeholders (including representatives both of large and small businesses and authorities) and establishment of a communication and cooperation platform between them.

• Examination of the requirements for e‐Freight solutions that are currently fulfilled in the target area and the ones that need to be addressed (the examination will be held within a business, technology, policy and legacy perspective).

• Adapting e‐Freight platform to the various needs and characteristics of the target areas (in terms of their technological level, their administrative, socio‐economic, legislative, etc., current status, and more).

EURIDICE Intelligent technologies

To develop and difuse the Intelligent Cargo concept. Also to

• Service platform centred on the individual cargo item and its interactions.


• Reliability and visibility of waterways would require tracking systems for cargo

EURIDICE adaptation to LA countries can be achieved by: • Identifying involved stakeholders and policy

Deliverable D2.2:



built an information service platform addressing simultaneously the logistics, business and public policy aspects of freight transportation.

status and position. • Much of the operation in stuffing and stripping of containers is in port, which hinders the operation modes, facilitated by the unitization of cargo.



• Lack of adequate operational safety. • Incipient congestion at border posts. • Nonstandard systems and documents. • Lack of harmonization of control services and support provided by organizations involved in the operations of customs control.

makers. • Identifying existing technologies.

• Adapting the proposed technologies to the existing ones.

• Training the potential users over the use of the EURIDICE platform. Also, establishing synergies with EU organizations.

GIFTS Intelligent technologies

To design and develop a fully Integrated Operational Platform – the GIFTS Integrated operational Platform (GIP) – for the use of systems that manage door‐to‐door freight transport in an intermodal as well as a uni‐modal

• A navigation system, involving GPS and EGNOS.

• A communication system, involving wireless and wired technology.

• An information system, providing services and using the communication and navigations systems between users’ systems and the GIFTS platform.



• Lack of adequate operational safety.

The GIP displays a high degree of transferability due to: • Its open, dynamic, constantly updated, flexible and easily adaptable services.

• The open policy for transportation services accessed through a common platform.

• Its ease of access. • Its mode independency. • The access in low‐cost technology services.

Deliverable D2.2:



sense. The main goal was to boost competition in the freight transport market by providing to SMEs access to high – technology services.

Parcelcall Intelligent technologies

To develop a new, unified information and communication plane, hence enabling seamless tracking and tracing solutions.

Parcelcall developed an open Architecture, integrating software prototypes of Thinking Tags and active alert services. Its key components are:

• Complemented 1‐D and 2‐D bar code labels by Radio‐Frequency Identification (RFID) tags (passive tags).

• Active “Thinking Tags”.

• Mobile Logistic Server (MLS).

• Goods Tracing Servers (GTS).

• Goods Information Server (GIS).




The Parcelcall Architecture is transferable as such, due to the simplicity of the system which does not require modification of existing IT infrastructures.

Parcelcall services can be transferable even to very small companies which do not have their own tracking and tracing system.

Deliverable D2.2:



MTrade Intelligent technologies

To introduce the GNSS positioning technologies (EGNOS and future GALILEO services) in the multimodal freight transport user community.

M‐TRADE solution is an integrated end‐to‐end system to provide users with: tracking & tracing of goods; identification of freight and efficient transhipment at Terminals and Nodes; monitoring of safe transport of hazardous and perishable goods.




• Lack of adequate operational safety. • Dangerous goods handling systems and tools for the monitoring and routing of dangerous goods.

The M‐Trade solution can be transferable to a very wide field of cases. Nevertheless, a set of actions is required, especially technological ones, in order for the EGNOS/Galileo system to be applicable. These actions should be targeted to possible technical gaps and obstacles that hinder the application of EGNOS/Galileo, i.e. lack of mobile equipment technology, ICT platform standards, RFID technologies, etc. Also, a minimum training effort over the proposed systems is required.

FREIGHTWISE

Standardization

To support the modal shift of cargo flows from road to intermodal transport by means of improved management and facilitation of information access. Also, to support Commission in formulating future legislation and developing initiatives for industry management

• Generic system architecture for intermodal transport management.

• Business guidelines for intermodal transport management.

• Virtual Transport Network.

• Education and training material.





• Nonstandard systems and documents. • Lack of harmonization of control services and support provided by organizations involved in the operations of customs control.

The Freightwise Framework (FWF) could be transferable to LA countries. In order for this to happen, the following actions should be taken into account: • Ensure the involvement of stakeholders – from large and small, public and private transport organizations – and the involvement of policy makers and standardization bodies.

• Adapt existing documentation to Freightwise standards.

• Assess possible legal challenges and security concerns which may arise from the

Deliverable D2.2:



solutions. implementation of FWF.

KOMODA E‐Logistics To produce a roadmap to nurture an integrated e‐Logistics platform by and between modes of freight transport across Europe.

• Current state of the European e‐Logistics.

• A visionary Europe wide e‐Logistics system supporting co‐modality.

• Roadmap for the implementation of the e‐Logistics platform.



• Much of the operation in stuffing and stripping of containers is in port, which hinders the operation modes, facilitated by the unitization of cargo



• Lack of points of primary and secondary storage nodes.

• Incipient development of logistics zones. • Nonstandard systems and documents. • Lack of harmonization of control services and support provided by organizations involved in the operations of customs control.

KOMODA results in the establishment of a roadmap which will guide the future implementation of an e‐Logistics platform. This product is transferable to LA countries as it can provide procedures and methodologies for future applications of innovative logistics platforms.

BestLog E‐Logistics To collect and disseminate logistics best practices through an active dialogue

• Platform that collects and disseminates the supply chain management knowledge on an

• Much of the operation in stuffing and stripping of containers is in port, which hinders the operation modes, facilitated by the unitization of cargo

• Problems of communication and

Logistics best practise case concept could be adapted in LA as well. This could be done by analysing LA practises or by utilizing findings of previously

Deliverable D2.2:



between various stakeholders.

ongoing base. information flow at ports. • Incipient development of logistics zones.

conducted best practise analysis in other areas.

BE LOGIC E‐Logistics To define benchmarking methodologies and develop a web‐based benchmarking tool, with the ultimate goal of improving the quality and efficiency within and across different transport modes.

• E‐tool for supporting the search for potential strategic improvements due to a modal change.

• Interface with urban areas, where problems, such as intersections with city streets and occupied the tracks of the field, persist and thereby reduce the efficiency of the system.






• Incipient congestion at border posts. • Nonstandard systems and documents.

The concept of benchmarking is very much transferable to LA, especially considering the need of SMEs. Some modifications may need to be made to Tool in respect of local characteristics. Also, the findings of European benchmarking and developed standards, reports and databases should be useful to employ in LA.

GOOD ROUTE

Dangerous goods

To develop a cooperative system for dangerous goods vehicles routing, monitoring, re‐routing, enforcement and driver support

• Common ontological framework and system architecture.

• Minimum Risk Route Guidance System.

• OBU • Control Centre and Logistic chain support modules.

• Dangerous goods handling systems and tools for the monitoring and routing of dangerous goods.

The concept is transferable as such. Identification of existing technologies is necessary in order to define the integration efforts for the proposed ones.

Deliverable D2.2:



based on dynamic, real time data.

• Enforcement System.• Vehicle platform. • Integrated system and service.

CHINOS Container management

To cope with continuous rising cargo volumes to be handled. Also, to deal with new security rules and regulations. Finally, to best integrate technologies for container identification and handling.

• Automatic container identification unit.

• Damage documentation system


• Need of warehousing areas and parking coordinated with port operation.

• Rail access to the new container port in La Plata.



• Lack of storage containers. • Issue of port security concern to operators of port terminals, especially in relation to additional costs and their impact on competitiveness.



The developed concept is transferable to LA as such. Identification of existing technology infrastructure to support the proposed IT technology solutions is needed in any case.

Deliverable D2.2:



VIT Container management

To finalize the design of the Metrocargo equipment by providing designing vision functionalities that will assure precise handling, verification of the train composition, safety and security.

• A vision system for container automatic load/unload.

• An innovative prototype of a low‐cost 2D visual module to scan the train composition.

• A video‐surveillance system to monitor automatic operation areas where personnel should not enter.

• A software predicting the effect on overall system performance depending on errors and failures of the vision devices and software.



• Lack of storage containers.

The project is transferable to LA as such. Further engineering and refining might be necessary.

COSMA Container management

To develop a software system to support the user for fulfilling his daily container terminal management tasks.

• COSMA Kernel • Container

Management • Overview of

Operative Processes• Warehouse

Management


• Lack of storage containers. • Much of the operation in stuffing and stripping of containers is in port, which hinders the operation modes, facilitated by the unitization of cargo.

• Weak coordination procedures for receiving and delivery of container terminals in exports. Potential for

The system is openly designed for the movement of containers on an intermodal container terminal. It is not restricted to (or does not implement) a special organisation or business model, no specialised intermodal infrastructure or equipment is addressed, no exceptional operation or services and it is completely independent

Deliverable D2.2:



technology applied to customs controls and procedures.





from legislation or policies. COSMA is not constricted to any country or region and can be used globally. Other automated handling equipment with similar controlling mechanisms can be attached and the program adapted. Actions to be supported: • Translate, if necessary, the user

interface language (currently in German)

• Provide training cources. INTERFACE

Border crossing operations management

To provide innovative solutions for the improvement of borders crossings terminals operations both between EU and Accession Countries (CEECs) and inside EU (France‐Spain, alpine crossing).

• Analysis of the state‐of‐the‐art.

• Case studies. • Scenario analysis. • Identification of intermodal solutions.

• Demonstrations in real environment and validation of the analysed solutions.

• Provision of guidelines and recommendations.

• Results and dissemination.


• Size’s restriction of the parking lots at border crossings.

• Lack of adequate operational safety. • Opening hours at border posts

insufficient or inadequate to the needs. • Minor use of the International Cargo

Manifest / Customs Transit Declaration International.

The technological solutions developed by the project are transferable to cases that operate with a similar way to the demonstrator cases. Two involved railway companies (ÖBB and CD) have already successfully adapted the developed tools to their network, which shows the high acceptability of the solutions among involved actors.

In order for the technological tools to be successfully integrated to the existing systems, interfaces between the latter must be adapted to the specific situation.

Deliverable D2.2: Freight Transport Innovations List


5.3. Holistic approach to addressing the key barriers and thresholds of the target areas

As already mentioned, deliverable 2.2 can be considered a supplementary to D2.1 “Best Practices Handbook”. Deliverable 2.1 is mainly oriented to industrial and business European best practices, whilst D2.2 to research innovations and emerging ideas. Both deliverables form a solid picture of European best practices which can successfully be used within and beyond ENABLE project. Regarding the current situation of intermodal freight transport in the target areas of Brazil and Argentina, the following table has been elaborated. The table correlates all best practices presented in D2.1 and D2.2 with the identified Brazilian and Argentinean key barriers, threshold and needs in their freight transport networks. Table 5 emerged from table 1 after abstracting the type of barriers that are out of EU intermodal focus (air and bulk transport, infrastructure topics that do not regard terminals for mode change and some institutional and regulatory issues – highlighted in grey in Table 1). As can be seen in the following table, few of the identified barriers and needs have remained unaddressed. This could mean either that the specific barriers are actually not barriers in Europe or that they haven’t been addressed by a European research or a business/industrial best practice.

Deliverable D2.2:



Table 5: Holistic approach to addressing the key barriers and thresholds of Argentina and Brazil through deliverables D2.1 and D2.2

TRANSPORTATION

SYSTEM

TYPE OF BARRIER

BRAZIL

BEST PRACTICES & RESEARCH

INNOVATIONS (ADDRESSING BRAZIL)

ARGENTINA

BEST PRACTICES &

RESEARCH INNOVATIONS (ADDRESSING ARGENTINA)

Operational Lack of supervision of the limit

loads carried by vehicles, which hinder the road structure and reduce the competitiveness of companies within the limits.

Need for enforcement of load restrictions on roads. Lack of compliance affects the economics of maintenance and reduces the competitiveness of truck operators complying.

Road transport

Institutional and

Regulatory

Excessive bureaucracy in international transport.

‐SMART CM ‐ FREIGHTWISE ‐ CHINOS - e‐Freight

Excessive bureaucracy in international transport. Not infrequently, border control of driver´s migratory papers may delay cargo already cleared.

‐SMART CM ‐ FREIGHTWISE ‐ CHINOS - e‐Freight

Transposition of rail freight through the São Paulo city could be facilitated by the “ring rail” in São Paulo state.

‐ VALENCIA ‐ RHINE CONTAINER

‐ BOXXPRESS

Need of warehousing areas and parking coordinated with port operation.

‐ CHINOS ‐ VIT ‐ COSMA

Inherited infrastructure built 80‐100 years ago. Coverage is good (density of demand in the south of the country isn’t likely to justify additions). Bringing new branches into service should be carefully assessed to avoid compromising current density of use.

‐ HUPAC ‐ POLZUG

Interface with urban areas, where problems, such as intersections with city streets and occupied the tracks of the field, persist and thereby reduce the efficiency of the system.

‐ BE LOGIC

Bi‐oceanic rail corridor needs to be promoted.

- HUPAC - POLZUG - DB‐Schenker - KUEHNE&NAGEL - SPC

Rail access to terminals in greater Rosario needs urgent expansion and adaptation. This issue is key for greater use of the entire railroad network. Railway access to Buenos Aires is clogged by the operation of metropolitan passenger services.

‐ VALENCIA ‐ BILK Combiterminal ‐ COCA COLA

Rail transport

Infrastructure

Guidelines for railway expansion in the Midwest.

- HUB Zahony - BILK Combiterminal

- POLZUG

Rail access to the new container port in La Plata, equally inherited, should receive attention.

‐ CHINOS

Deliverable D2.2:



Rail access to the port of Sepetiba.

- VALENCIA - BOXXPRESS

Rail network which has different sizes of gauges of the neighboring countries and some national meshes well.

- HUB Zahony

Rail links from Argentina to northern Chile, Eastern Bolivia and Paraguay, in fair and good condition, but underutilized. Rail connection to Brazil dependent on transfer at rail yard at Uruguayana given the different gauges. International rail operations are not usual for rail operators and employees. Inefficiencies in border controls may favor fear to reach this latent cargo market.

- HUPAC - HUB Zahony - ILK Combiterminal

- POLZUG - VOLVO - COCA COLA

Intensify use rail to stimulate the rail and road integration.

- e‐Freight - FREIGHTWISE ‐ KOMODA ‐ BE LOGIC ‐ VIT

Operational

Low use of rail for freight between Brazil and Argentina.

- BILK Combiterminal

- HUB Zahony - VOLVO - IPC/SPC

One issue that should receive more attention is the possibility to develop a management system to allow for shared infrastructure use of different cargo operators. One port operator has shown interest in expanding to rail operations. Large mining companies could as well consider becoming operators if legal framework is available.

‐ D2D

Infrastructure

Access by road and rail networks to ports and inland terminals.

- VALENCIA - POLZUG - BOXXPRESS

Shipping is not competitive enough with the road system.

‐D2D ‐SMART CM - e‐Freight ‐ FREIGHTWISE ‐ BE LOGIC ‐ CHINOS

Waterborne (Ports and Inland Waterways)

Operational

Need to improve inland sections of inland waterways with existing operation and with potential to operate.

- RHINE CONTAINER

- CORMAN

Reliability and visibility of waterways would require tracking systems for cargo status and position. This is a relevant problem in River Plate´s (Paraná, Paraguay+Upper Paraguay) basin given the extended transit times currently treaded by cargo. Potential bulk cargo from Bolivia, Paraguay and Brazil subject to event highertransit times.

‐D2D ‐ EURIDICE ‐GIFTS ‐Parcelcall ‐M‐Trade

Deliverable D2.2:



Problems in land access are critical to port operations.

- BOXXPRESS - VALENCIA

Problems in road access and highways links in metropolitan areas of Rosario and Buenos Aires. Congestion, overlapping with local traffic, entrances to terminals in some cases still. Numerous Buffer yards for trucks have been built but the problems remains. IT to coordinate origin‐destination timing may apply.

- BOXXPRESS - VALENCIA

Problems in access routes, such as maintenance and deepening of channels and berths.

Lack of storage containers.

‐SMART CM ‐ CHINOS ‐ VIT ‐ COSMA

Infrastructure

Studies for economic and environmental feasibility of new port areas.

Problems in access routes.

Much of the operation in stuffing and stripping of containers is in port, which hinders the operation modes, facilitated by the unitization of cargo.

‐D2D ‐SMART CM ‐EURIDICE ‐ KOMODA ‐ BE LOGIC - BestLog - CHINOS - COSMA

Weak coordination procedures for receiving and delivery of container terminals in exports. Potential for technology applied to customs controls and procedures.

‐D2D ‐ FREIGHTWISE ‐ KOMODA

Little use of inland ports due to difficulties in connection with other modes of transport.

- RHINE CONTAINER

- CORMAN

Road congestion around main ports (greater Rosario and Buenos Aires).

- VALENCIA Operational

Encourage the waterway transport through the Paraguay River to Argentina.

- RHINE CONTAINER

- CORMAN

Lack of clear definition of the model of private participation in port terminals in both the public ports and outside the port area.

- GERMAN TERMINAL POLICY

Waterborne (Ports and Maritime Long Course and Cabotage)

Institutional and

Regulatory

Strategy deployment of new ports; no guideline that limits competition and complementarity between existing ports and new ports.

- SKEMA - STORA‐ENSO

Deliverable D2.2:



Issue of port security concern to operators of port terminals, especially in relation to additional costs and their impact on competitiveness.

‐SMART CM - e‐Freight - GIFTS - Parcelcall - M‐Trade ‐EURIDICE ‐ CHINOS ‐ COSMA

Problems of communication and information flow at ports.

‐ D2D ‐ M‐Trade ‐ EURIDICE ‐SMART CM - e‐Freight ‐ KOMODA ‐ BE LOGIC - BestLog - CHINOS - COSMA

Infrastructure

Lack of points of primary and secondary storage nodes.

‐ KOMODA ‐ BE LOGIC ‐ COSMA ‐ INTERFACE

Size’s restriction of the parking lot of the Cristo Redentor border.

‐ INTERFACE

Incipient congestion at border posts.

‐ D2D ‐SMART CM - e‐Freight ‐ EURIDICE ‐ BE LOGIC ‐ INTERFACE

Operational

Lack of adequate operational safety.

‐SMART CM - e‐Freight - GIFTS - Parcelcall - M‐Trade ‐EURIDICE ‐ CHINOS ‐ COSMA ‐ INTERFACE

Incipient development of logistics zones.

‐ KOMODA ‐ BE LOGIC - BestLog

Non standard systems and documents.

‐SMART CM ‐ e‐Freight ‐EURIDICE ‐ FREIGHTWISE ‐ BE LOGIC - BestLog - KOMODA - PORT INFOLINK - VALENCIAPORT - SHORT SEA XML

Warehousing and border crossing


Opening hours at border posts insufficient or inadequate to the needs.

‐ INTERFACE

Deliverable D2.2:



Lack of harmonization of control services and support provided by organizations involved in the operations of customs control.

- D2D - SMART‐CM - e‐Freight ‐ EURIDICE ‐ FREIGHTWISE ‐ KOMODA

Minor use of the International Cargo Manifest / Customs Transit Declaration International.

‐ INTERFACE

Deliverable D2.2:Freight Transport Innovations List

page 149

6. CONCLUDING REMARKS The deliverable D2.2 outlines the most significant European research and development (R&D) projects and innovations in the field of intermodal freight transport relevant to the ENABLE project. The effort was fully aligned with ENABLE main objectives, namely to boost the competitiveness of the intermodal freight transport in the target area of Latin America and to reinforce the external relations of EU with LA countries through European know‐how transfer to this target area.

The current deliverable provided a robust methodology applied for the identification and presentation of the European research projects and innovations. The starting points for the above identification were both the review and analysis of the intermodal freight transport system in the target countries of Argentina and Brazil (delivered within a previous ENABLE’s technical activity) and the various projects’ events that took place in these two countries. The above starting points enabled the identification of the research priorities in the target LA countries, which, consequently, provided the most helpful tool for identifying, within the vast amount of European research activities, those that best fitted the Argentinean and Brazilian research needs, as well as best addressed their key barriers and thresholds in the field of freight transport.

It should be mentioned that a small percentage of the whole European research was selected and presented, which was the culmination of a thorough review of the European research innovations and emerging ideas. The review resulted in a comprehensive description of each research project. Nonetheless, the whole effort did not conclude only to a mere description of each project:

• The relevance of each project to the specific LA barriers and needs was examined and presented. The identified specific barriers, thresholds and needs of the intermodal freight transport in Argentina and Brazil were matrix‐correlated with the best practices of both deliverables 2.1 and 2.2 (see section 5.3, Table 5). The relevant table refers to the type of barriers that are in the focus of EU intermodal policy (air and bulk transport, infrastructure topics that do not regard terminals for mode change and some institutional and regulatory issues, were not considered). Few of the identified barriers and needs have remained unaddressed, meaning either that the specific barriers are actually not barriers in Europe or that they haven’t been addressed by a European research or a business/industrial best practice.

• Key issues regarding each project’s transferability to the target areas were delivered. A preliminary analysis has been elaborated with the aim to provide some general guidelines in order for the European know‐how to be successfully transferred to the LA target countries. This is the core technical aspect that will be performed in the next stage of ENABLE.

The review of the European best research practices, as well as the transferability approach, was built upon a thematic clustering into the following seven (7) thematic areas, where each one of the sixteen (16) identified research projects was integrated:

1. Long doortodoor transport chains

2. Intelligent technologies

3. Standardization

4. ELogistics

Deliverable D2.2:



5. Dangerous goods

6. Container management

7. Border crossing operations management

Finally, it should be highlighted that the deliverables D2.1 and D2.2 were deployed in a supplementary way, the first oriented towards industrial and business European best practices and the second to research projects, innovations and emerging ideas, and both within the frame of addressing the freight transport LA barriers and needs.

Deliverable D2.2:



BIBLIOGRAPHY Documents:

• Giannopoulos G. A. “Towards a European ITS for freight transport and logistics: Results of current EU funded research and prospects for the future”. European Transport Research Review. Volume 1, No 4, pp. 147‐167. 2009.

• PROMIT project deliverables D3.1‐3.3: Best Practices Year 1, 2 and 3, April 2009.

• EURIDICE project deliverable D33.1 Dissemination Strategy Plan, July 2008.

• GIFTS project deliverable D7 Final Report, March 2005.

• FREITHWISE project deliverable D11.1 Freight Market Structure and Requirements for Intermodal Shifts, July 2007.

• FREITHWISE project deliverable D.12.3 Requirements Handbook, November 2008.

• FREITHWISE project deliverable D12.4 High Level Formal Model Final, October 2006.

• FREITHWISE project deliverable D13.1 Harmonisation Strategy, October 2008.

• FREITHWISE project deliverable D13.2 Freightwise Framework Architecture, July 2008.

• FREITHWISE project deliverable D13.4 Recommendations for Standardisation, January 2008.

• FREITHWISE project deliverable D16.8 Training Material, January 2009.

• FREITHWISE project deliverable D17.1a Evaluation Framework, September 2007.

• FREITHWISE project deliverable D17.1b_Validation Plan Framework, June 2008.

• FREITHWISE project deliverable D19.1 Identification of multipliers policies and directive initiatives, August 2007.

• GOOD ROUTE project deliverable D1.1 Scenarios of use and dangerous goods ontological framework, September 2006.

• GOOD ROUTE project deliverable D10.3 Final Report, January 2009.

• CHINOS project deliverable D0.4 Final Report, May 2009.

• VIT project deliverable D4.1 Report of the Feasibility Study, July 2009.

Internet links:

• ERA official website: http://ec.europa.eu/research/era/index_en.htm

• ERTRAC official website: http://www.ertrac.org/

• ACARE official website: http://www.acare4europe.com/

• WATERBORNE official website: http://www.waterborne‐tp.org/

• EIRAC official website: http://www.eirac.eu/

Deliverable D2.2:



• ECTRI official website: http://www.ectri.org/

• D2D public website: www.d2d.no/d2d

• D2D project details: http://www.transport‐research.info/web/projects/project_details.cfm?id=4614&backlink=/web/common/search.cfm&referer=currentpage*2|ispostback*true|contenttypes*Projects|pagesize*50|tools*23

• D2D project details: http://www.ist‐world.org/ProjectDetails.aspx?ProjectId=8aabf2e84c5d4c8ea77e213f0efd7d8f

• SMART‐CM public website: http://www.smart‐cm.eu

• E‐Freight public website: http://www.efreightproject.eu/

• EURIDICE public website: http://www.euridice‐project.eu

• GIFTS public website: http://www.newapplication.it/gifts • GIFTS leaflet:

http://www.newapplication.it/gifts/project_deliverables/public/GIFTS_LEAFLET.pdf

• GIFTS brochure: http://www.newapplication.it/gifts/project_deliverables/public/GIFTS_BROCHURE.pdf

• PROMIT project deliverable D3.3: http://www.promit‐project.net/UploadedFiles/Deliverables/PROMIT_BPH3_April09_cp_MSR.pdf

• Parcelcall project details: http://cordis.europa.eu/search/index.cfm?fuseaction=proj.document&PJ_RCN=5108557

• Parcelcall project details: http://www‐i4.informatik.rwth‐aachen.de/parcelcall/

• Parcelcall project details: http://www‐i4.informatik.rwth‐aachen.de/parcelcall/publications/IST‐Summit2000.pdf

• M‐trade website: http://www.newapplication.it/mtrade/mtrade_home.html

• M‐trade leaflet: http://galileo.cs.telespazio.it/mtrade/public/leaflets/MTRADE‐leaflet.pdf

• FREIGTHWISE public website: www.freightwise.info

• KOMODA public website: http://www.komodaproject.com/

• BestLog Flyer: http://www.bestlog.org/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=0&file=fileadmin/bestlog/flyer.pdf&t=1281518809&hash=ae0ab3f2867edf2a05fa8cbfa8181aa6

• BestLog presentation: http://www.bestlog.org/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=0&file=fileadmin/bestlog/BestLog_short.pdf&t=1281518809&hash=f9863f9a7be551790b0159312e2de555

• BestLog public website: http://www.bestlog.org/

• Be‐Logic public website: http://www.be‐logic.info/

• Be‐Logic brochure: http://www.be‐logic.info/documents/BE_Logic_brochure.pdf

Deliverable D2.2:



• GOOD ROUTE public website: http://www.goodroute‐eu.org/

• CHINOS flyer: (http://www.chinos‐rfid.eu/docs/public/CHINOS%20flyer.pdf)

• CHINOS public website: http://www.chinos‐rfid.eu/

• VIT project website: (http://www.vitproject.eu/)

• VIT project details: http://cordis.europa.eu/search/index.cfm?fuseaction=proj.document&PJ_LANG=EN&PJ_RCN=10233749&pid=0&q=545D8900A7BC1747957009CD1E2CCCF9&type=adv

• INTERFACE project details: http://www.transport‐research.info/web/projects/project_details.cfm?id=7636