Research Article
Storage Space Allocation of Inbound Container in Railway Container Terminal
Table 5
Comparison between OA and RAA in 7 days.
| Planning period | Our approach (OA) | Random allocation algorithm (RAA) | GAP1 | GAP2 | Imbalance amounts | Overlapping amounts | Imbalance amounts | Overlapping amounts |
| 1 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 9 | 57.1% | 77.8% | 2 | 7 | 8 | 11 | 14 | 36.4% | 42.9% | 3 | 11 | 14 | 18 | 21 | 38.9% | 33.3% | 4 | 8 | 10 | 13 | 17 | 38.5% | 41.2% | 5 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 60.0% | 75.0% | 6 | 13 | 11 | 17 | 25 | 23.5% | 56.0% | 7 | 16 | 13 | 22 | 19 | 27.3% | 31.6% | 8 | 11 | 8 | 14 | 11 | 21.4% | 27.3% | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 10 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 11 | 40.0% | 72.7% | 11 | 15 | 9 | 19 | 17 | 21.1% | 47.1% | 12 | 13 | 7 | 15 | 15 | 13.3% | 53.3% | 13 | 5 | 0 | 11 | 3 | 54.5% | 100.0% | 14 | 9 | 3 | 17 | 11 | 47.1% | 72.7% | 15 | 13 | 15 | 24 | 27 | 45.8% | 44.4% | 16 | 7 | 11 | 19 | 24 | 63.2% | 54.2% | 17 | 3 | 0 | 9 | 4 | 66.7% | 100.0% | 18 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 11 | 50.0% | 45.5% | 19 | 11 | 14 | 15 | 19 | 26.7% | 26.3% | 20 | 9 | 7 | 21 | 19 | 57.1% | 63.2% | 21 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 66.7% | 100.0% | 22 | 6 | 5 | 13 | 13 | 53.8% | 61.5% | 23 | 19 | 17 | 27 | 26 | 29.6% | 34.6% | 24 | 9 | 4 | 13 | 16 | 30.8% | 75.0% | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 26 | 11 | 5 | 19 | 9 | 42.1% | 44.4% | 27 | 18 | 10 | 22 | 23 | 18.2% | 56.5% | 28 | 12 | 7 | 18 | 15 | 33.3% | 53.3% |
|
|
Notes: GAP1 = (imbalance amounts obtained from RAA − imbalance amounts obtained from OA) * 100/imbalance amounts obtained from RAA. GAP2 = (overlapping amounts obtained from RAA − overlapping amounts obtained from OA) * 100/overlapping amounts obtained from RAA.
|