Automated Luggage Handling Systems
by
Stanley
D. Pebsworth
Embry
Riddle Aeronautical University
March
2016
Research paper submitted to the Worldwide
Campus in partial fulfillment of the requirements for course UNSY 610, Unmanned
Systems Autonomy and Automation
Abstract
If you have ever traveled on a commercial airline, you have most
assuredly asked yourself, “I wonder if my baggage made it?”
Disconsolately standing, you watch the empty luggage carousel go round
and round waiting for the magical appearance of the luggage you trustingly
deposited at your departure airport.
With the continuing advancements in automation, digital communications,
and robotics, there must be an answer for the maligned luggage handling of
airline operations. Automated luggage
handling is not a new endeavor. In 2005,
Denver International Airport (KDEN) attempted an automated luggage handling
system. It was not until $560M USD in
delay costs that the project was scraped due in part to their proposed
automated luggage handling system. In
2008, London Heathrow (EGLL) encountered serious issues with a luggage handling
system that delayed the opening of their new Terminal Five. The intent of this paper will be to review
past attempts at automated luggage handling systems and analyze where failures
occurred. After careful analysis, this
paper will review new and more modern technology that might address past issues
with automation of luggage handling.
This paper will conclude with a proposal and vision for the successful
implementation of an automated luggage handling system.
Keywords: automation, autonomy, luggage handling, airport
operations
Automated Luggage Handling System
One of the most
complex tasks at airports is not the movement of passenger or security, but the
seemingly simple task of handling and routing of baggage (Nopper, J., ten Hompel, M., 2010).
Airlines realize that baggage handling plays a part in traveler
satisfaction as well as airports realizing that the quality of their handling
system will attract airlines to their hub (Nice, K., 2001). Baggage handling has three jobs: move bags
from check in to gate, gate to connecting gate for transfer, and gate to
baggage claim. This handling is done
using destination coded vehicle (DCVs), automatic scanners that scan labels on
baggage, and miles of conveyors and sorting machines (Nice, K., 2001).
The
measure of a quality baggage handling system is simple, do bags move from point
A to point B effectively and efficiently?
An airports goal is to be able to move bags as quickly as they can move
passengers. In other words, your bag is
waiting on you at baggage claim when you arrive at baggage claim (Nice, K.,
2001). Baggage handling systems also
work as traffic monitors. They have the
ability to identify a bag, locate jams, volume regulation, load balancing, bag
counting, and bag tracking and redirection (Jebakumari,
D. A., Godweena, K. A., & Kavyaa, R., 2014).
In Airports around the world today, updates are
slowly being made to luggage handling systems.
These updates rang form the 100 percent use of Radio Frequency
Identification (RFID) tags to DCV’s.
These systems are easy to implement in new airports and are rather
difficult and costly for older airports.
Airports are implementing more modern luggage handling to include the
removal of the truck and cart systems and interconnecting terminals via
underground luggage transport systems that can continually move bags. Unlike the truck and cart systems, these
types of systems are less prone to mishandling (Anderson, A., 2012).
Problem Statement
What
seems like a simple task to most, baggage handling is getting more and more
complex. With long waits at security
checkpoints and larger passenger volumes, baggage handling has become a
complicated procedure (Jebakumari, D. A., et al, 2014). IATA
statistics in 2010 stated that airlines have incurred over $2.5 billion US from
baggage mishandling (Jebakumari, D. A., et al, 2014).
Case
in point is the Denver International Airport (KDEN). During its initial design, the airport was to
have one of the most complex automated systems for baggage handling. Due to breakdowns in project management the
completion of the airport was delayed costing the city of Denver $1.1 Million
US per day (Calleam Consulting Ltd. (2008).
The breakdown was in part due to underestimating the complexity of the
baggage handling system, changes in strategy, scheduling pressure to complete
the airport on time, communication breakdowns, poor design, and lack of
management oversight (Calleam Consulting Ltd., 2008). Because of these
breakdowns, the final system design was nothing like the original design. Rather
than full automation between all three concourses, the automated system was
only used on one concourse and a manual truck and cart system was used to
transfer to the other two concourses (Calleam Consulting Ltd., 2008).
Baggage
handling is considered an inclusive service offered by airlines and thus
airlines believed that baggage handling accuracy and efficiency was of less
concern. Airlines were more concerned
with the timely turnaround of aircraft which would maximize revenue per seat
mile. Baggage handling plays a key role
in how quickly an airline can turn a plane at the gate and therefore largely
affects fixed costs. Airline passengers
expect that their baggage will meet them at their destination and thus plays a
key role in customer satisfaction in the Airline. Airlines have often placed the priority of
baggage handling beneath quick turns at the gate to increase revenue. Airlines have begun to realize the problems
with this business ethic (Zane, C. K., & Reyes, P.
M., 2010).
Significance of Problem Statement
Turnaround
times at gates are the greatest source of delays for Airlines. These delays only compound themselves through
the day as planes move from airport to airport.
Baggage handling plays a key role in this turnaround time and therefore
greatly effects Airline revenue and customer satisfaction. The offloading and distribution process of
baggage has a mean time of 16.3 minutes and a standard deviation of 8.07
minutes (Zane, C.K., et al, 2010). Offloading
and on loading of baggage is still a hands on job and with airlines beginning
to fly larger aircraft, has greatly increased the time for offloading and on
loading. Passengers are also flying with
10 percent more baggage. It is believed
that in 10 years there will be a 259 percent increase in baggage processing
(Zane, C.K., et al, 2010).
Additional
issues are the labor required for baggage sorting. Since only a few personnel fit in the baggage
compartment of a narrow body aircraft, simply increasing the amount of labor to
handle the increase in baggage is not the answer. Increasing the time available to sort and
transport the baggage is another possibility, but assumes that passengers and
their baggage arrive early. A paradox
exists in where to implement a corrective action to both increase customer
satisfaction and improve airline revenue per seat mile.
Alternative Actions
Several
companies are researching alternative actions in the baggage handling
process. Beumer Group has developed a
high speed baggage transport system called CrisBag®. With their system, each piece of baggage is
placed into a tote-based transport system.
This system can track each piece of baggage at every stage of the
handling process. This one bag per tote
process eliminates the need for additional handling once the bag in checked in
until the bag arrives at the destination gate (Beumergroup, n.d.).
Another
company called Alstef has developed an automated baggage handling system that
integrates a destination coded vehicle (DCV) called BagEpress®. This system is capable of processing 120
pieces of luggage an hour. The
advantages of this solution is that it is a plug and play system that can be
implemented in steps and is a better management of resources (Alstef, n.d.).
In
all of these handling processes there is a large amount of computer processing
and design that must be carefully thought out prior to implementation. A company called Logplan is an airport
logistics company that is a world leader in baggage handling and airport
consulting (Logplan, n.d.). Founded in
1987, their main goal is the implementation of their 100% baggage screening
process, implementation of advanced automated baggage handling systems, and
providing support for future projects (Logplan, n.d.).
Several additional
alternative innovations have been developed in the baggage handling field over
the past few years. At the Amsterdam
Airport Schiphol, they have developed an on demand baggage handling system that
was honored with an innovation award in 2011.
This system places all baggage in a central sort facility where a
robotic arm locates, sorts, and loads baggage onto carts. This process removes the human aspect of this
process (Lo, C., 2012).
Another innovation that
many airports are looking into is the use of Radio Frequency Identification
(RFID) tags. This technology has been
used in the logistics supply world for decades, but only recently been adopted
into the baggage handling world. The
advantage to RFID over bar coded tags is that there is no line of sight
requirement to identify a bag which facilitates a much higher rate of baggage
identification. This concept also
reduces the amount of bags that must be sorted manually (Lo, C., 2012).
Self-service innovation
has been taking hold at airports across the world as well. This innovation allows passengers access to
baggage drop off points that are always available. This gives passengers the ability to not be
required to stand in long ques and rather check-in and drop off their baggage
in complete control of the process. This
process increases capacity resulting in a higher passenger efficiency and also
offers an automated means in the event of lost baggage (Lo, C., 2012).
Recommendations and Vision
Even
with the increasing technology and implementation of automated sorting and
transportation system, the system of on loading and offloading of baggage from
an airplanes cargo hold remains outdated.
This time-critical process to aircraft turn times is further hindered by
weather and cramped spaces within narrow bodied aircraft (Rijsenbrij, J., &
Ottjes, J., 2007). Recommendations for the increase of baggage
sorting and processing time at check-in and at the gate must be addressed in
order to increase airline revenue and reduce airline baggage claims (Rijsenbrij, J., & Ottjes, J., 2007).
The following
recommendations will be addressed: increase speed of baggage handling time, reduce
baggage cart congestion on air-side roads, mechanism to deal with last minute
gate changes and aircraft delays, and implementation of short term storage
between terminal and gate.
Increased
Speed of Baggage Handling Time
The
100% use of RFID tags must be implemented to increase processing time of
baggage. This system has an improved
accuracy rate over traditional bar-code tags (Zhang,
T., Ouyang, Y., & He, Y., 2008). RFID is a simple cost effective means to
provide traceability of baggage throughout the entire baggage handling
process. An additional benefit to RFID
is the cost benefit. It is assumed that
over the period of one year, the cost benefit to a single airline would be
$175K US due to improvements in loss and damage (Zhang, T. et al, 2008).
An
RFID system consists of an electronic tag or transponder, antennas and readers,
and software that controls the RFID data (Saygin, C.,
& Natarajan, B., 2010). The RFID
system is a wireless system in that it requires no visual recognition of
luggage tags. Factors that affect the identification
capacity and accuracy are as follows: the conveyor speed or the time the tags
stays in the interrogation zone, the reader antenna power which determines the
size of the interrogation zone, and the number of reader antennas in the system
which improves interrogation accuracy (Saygin, C.,
& Natarajan, B. (2010).
Reduced
Baggage Cart Congestion on Air-side Roads
With
the implementation of route choice control, baggage can be autonomously sorted
when received at check in and routed to either a holding area or the gate
depending on time of departure and gate assignment. This process can also be implemented at the
gate in which bags can be offloaded onto a conveyor system that autonomously
identifies the bag and routes the bag to a connecting gate, holding facility,
or baggage claim with no need to transport via outdated truck and cart systems
(Tarău, A., De Schutter, B., & Hellendoorn, J., 2009). As
earlier discussed, the use of DVCs aides in expeditious routing of
baggage. The computational requirements
for routing of these DVCs is enormous.
An alternative approach to these computations is addressed in research
done by Tarău, A. N., De Schutter, B., &
Hellendoorn, J., (2011) in which the
concept of using a mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) helps reduce
computational needs.
Mechanism
to Deal with Last Minute Gate Changes and Aircraft Delays
In
2011, airline passengers saw a 35 percent increase in mishandled bags
(Anderson, A., 2012). This was due in
part to the luggage failing to load on the same aircraft that the passenger had
boarded. Issues cited included the fact
that last minute gate changes increased mishandling of luggage (Anderson, A.,
2012). In most airports, as the
passenger arrives, their luggage is routed to the gate of departure, and then
placed on a cart on the ramp. If there
is a gate change, this cart must be identified and re-routed by ground to the
new gate.
A
mechanism to deal with this issue would be the implementation of luggage
transfer systems that interconnect each terminal area. This mechanism would eliminate the need for
the truck and cart systems and could move luggage much quicker. Each piece of luggage could be identified as
having a connecting flight or nonstop flight via an automated sorting system
and routed as needed. Luggage could be
routed in an order that places nonstop bags in first and connecting bags in
last at the gate. As the aircraft lands,
this process would be reversed.
Implementation
of Short Term Storage Between Terminal and Gate
Transfer mishandling accounted for 53 percent of mishandled bags in 2011
(Andersson, A., 2012). This mishandling could be
reduced by not placing luggage at the gate and instead placing luggage in a
short term handling area and not routed to the gate where the luggage could
wait for hours before the flight arrives.
This would reduce the amount of luggage carts cluttering the ramp posing
a safety hazard and also reduce the chances of pilfering if the short term
storage area was a secure area.
Conclusion
The good news is that many advances have been made and research
conducted on the logistical nightmare of airport luggage routing and handling
helping to ensure that luggage mishandling is a thing of the past. It is believed that with a few simple changes
such as the 100 percent use of RFID that the frustrated passenger waiting frantically
at the luggage carousel will be a thing of the past. Research must also continue into the on
loading and offloading of luggage into narrow body aircraft that removes the
human aspect of this process.
The intent of this
paper was to review past attempts at automated luggage handling systems and
analyze where failures have occurred.
After careful analysis, this paper reviewed new and more modern
technology that addresses past issues with automation of luggage handling. This paper concluded with recommendations and
vision for the successful implementation of an automated luggage handling
systems for the future.
References
Alstef.
(n.d.) Alstef Automation – Automated baggage handling systems. airport-technology.com. Retrieved from http://www.airport-technology.com/contractors
/baggage/alstef/
Andersson, A. (2012).
Handling baggage: Alex andersson searches for signs that the days of lost
luggage are consigned to the past. Business Traveller Asia Pacific, 70.
Beumergroup.
(n.d.). Crisbag – High speed baggage transport and sortation system. Retrieved
from https://www.beumergroup.com/en/products/airport-baggage-handling-systems/high-speed-transportation-systems/crisbagr
Calleam
Consulting Ltd. (2008). Case Study – Denver International Airport baggage
handling system – An illustration of ineffectual decision making. Retrieved
from http://calleam .com /WTPF/wp-content/uploads/articles/DIABaggage.pdf
Jebakumari, D. A., Godweena, K. A., &
Kavyaa, R.
(2014). Automated air baggage security enhancements with biometric recognition
using programmable logic controller. International Journal of Computer
Applications, 96(2), 12-17.
doi:10.5120/16765-6327
Lo,
C. (2012). Airport baggage systems go high-tech: handling with care. Airport-technology.com. Retrieved from http://www.airport-technology.com/features
/featureairport-baggage-handling-systems/
Logplan.
(n.d.). World leader in baggage handling, airport and transportation
consulting. Retrieved from http://www.logplan.com/
Nice,
K. (2001). How baggage handling works. HowStuffWorks.com.
Retrieved from http://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/flight/modern/baggage-handling.htm
Nopper, J. R., & ten
Hompel, M. (2010). Quantification of life cycle advantages through increased
expansion flexibility of self-organized baggage-handling systems. Logistics
Research, 2(3), 135-146.
doi:10.1007/s12159-010-0032-7
Rijsenbrij, J., &
Ottjes, J. (2007). New developments in airport baggage handling systems.
Transportation Planning and Technology, 30(4), 417-430. doi:10.1080/03081060701461899
Saygin, C., &
Natarajan, B. (2010). RFID-based baggage-handling system design. Sensor
Review, 30(4), 324-335. doi:10.1108/02602281011072215
Tarău, A., De Schutter,
B., & Hellendoorn, J. (2009). Route choice control of automated baggage
handling systems. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
Transportation Research Board, 2106, 76-82. doi:10.3141/2106-09
Tarău, A. N., De
Schutter, B., & Hellendoorn, J. (2011). Predictive route control for
automated baggage handling systems using mixed-integer linear programming.
Transportation Research Part C, 19(3),
424-439. doi:10.1016/j.trc.2010.06.004
Zane, C. K., & Reyes,
P. M. (2010). Airlines' plight: Where has all the luggage gone? Management
Research Review, 33(7), 767. doi:10.1108/01409171011055834
Zhang, T., Ouyang, Y.,
& He, Y. (2008). Traceable air baggage handling system based on RFID tags
in the airport. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce
Research, 3(1), 106.
No comments:
Post a Comment