Here’s How an End-to-End Intermodal Shipment Tracking System Works

2022-10-06 23:30:47
关注

Here's How an End-to-End Intermodal Shipment Tracking System Works
Illustration: © IoT For All

Intermodal shipments are advancing at a dizzying pace, and so is shipment monitoring technology, including intermodal shipment tracking systems. The industry has taken three distinct approaches to intermodal shipment tracking, namely the carrier data aggregation approach, the IoT sensor approach, and a blended ‘sensor + non-sensor’ platform approach. Let’s explore how these three approaches address intermodal shipment tracking. We’ll also discuss the level of visibility that each of these approaches offers to enable you to achieve On-Time In-Full (OTIF) deliveries and cold chain compliance in multimodal shipping across the road, rail, air, or ocean.

'Multimodal shipping is clearly the future of logistics, especially in a world where shipping distances are increasing.' -RoambeeClick To Tweet

Multimodal shipping is clearly the future of logistics, especially in a world where shipping distances are increasing, and it’s mostly good news if you can efficiently run your intermodal shipment operations.

As per the Global Multimodal Freight Transportation Market report (2020 – 2025), “multimodal transport can improve transportation efficiency by 30 percent, reduce cargo damage by 10 percent, reduce transportation costs by 20 percent, reduce highway congestion by more than 50 percent, and promote energy savings and emissions reduction by more than one third.”

But this kind of exponential growth also requires the intermodal shipment tracking systems to grow at the same pace in terms of technology and efficiency.

The non-linear flow of intermodal cargo has to rely on scheduled and unscheduled transportation by road, rail, air, and ocean. In such cases, just knowing the whereabouts of the shipment at an order level isn’t enough. One also needs to know the exact shipment location and package condition. Accurate ETA prediction and cold chain compliance are also two of the most important aspects when dealing with intermodal shipments, and most shipments these days involve multiple modes. All this is not possible without a well-implemented intermodal shipment tracking system.

Thanks to technology advancements, you can track a package’s journey today. But is it really that easy?

Let’s begin by understanding how complex an intermodal shipping operation is by following a shipment.

The Journey of an Intermodal Shipment

Let’s visualize the steps in an LCL (Less Than Container Load) ocean shipment from Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia to Chicago in the United States.

  1. Picked up from the consignor in Kuala Lumpur city.
  2. Hauled to the nearby consolidation warehouse in Kuala Lumpur; combined with other LCLs.
  3. Hauled to another consolidation location for containerization.
  4. Container is then hauled to Port Klang, the nearest seaport.
  5. Container is checked in and export customs clearance at Port Klang in Malaysia.
  6. Container is placed in the right bay awaiting its vessel journey.
  7. Once the vessel arrives, it is loaded onto the vessel and reaches the New York port in the US.
  8. Between Kuala Lumpur and New York, the container could undergo transshipment at another port.
  9. Upon reaching New York, the container is unloaded and placed in the right bay to await import clearance processes.
  10. Within port operations, it may move locations multiple times to complete the clearance checklist.
  11. Upon successful clearance, the container is hauled for deconsolidation.
  12. After deconsolidation, it undertakes its last-mile journey to Chicago and within Chicago for delivery to the consignee.

You will notice that the intermodal shipment in this example is touched (physically handled) at least ten times in the process by different actors in the chain of custody. It travels through 3 different modes, is checked in/out through at least 5 transshipment points, and is consolidated and de-consolidated at least twice.

In an intermodal shipment, i.e., one that involves many of these transporters, transshipment points, and touchpoints, it is often hard to get end-to-end visibility. It is even harder to know if the shipment reached its destination on time and in good condition, especially if the container requires active cooling.

Therefore, let us look at the approaches to getting visibility on a multimodal shipment, how they work, and which one would best suit a multimodal shipment.

1. Carrier Data Aggregation Approach for Intermodal Shipment Tracking

Real-time transportation visibility platforms (RTTVPs) collect data from the carrier or transporter telematics, ships, flights, and other crowdsourced feeds to offer visibility. Telematics hardware (for the first and last mile) is usually owned by the carriers or transporters and integrated with the visibility platform (if they are present).

Users typically pay a small fee just to access the aggregation platform; there is no cost associated with the hardware. Data from multiple touchpoints are collated and presented on a portal or accessed using APIs.

Drawbacks

This is the easiest route to visibility, but it comes with several drawbacks. These systems don’t solve the challenge of verifiability, data cohesiveness, and actionability as they rely on numerous actors in the supply chain for supplying data.

Here are a few examples of the challenges that multimodal/intermodal shipments face when it comes to aggregating data as an approach to getting end-to-end visibility:

  1. Visibility is not real-time — The ELD or telematics data is aggregated through APIs, and not always is the visibility data instant or a reflection of the present.
  2. No definitive first & last mile visibility — The information you get from your multimodal transport operators (MTOs) is mostly incomplete and unverifiable. Sometimes this information is manually gathered or not available at all, making it even more unreliable.
  3. Order-level visibility at best — If you are shipping LCL cargo or need item-level information, these platforms cannot always verify it as most vessels and airlines share data at an order level.
  4. Lack of condition monitoring data — The data is at an order, truck, ship, or flight level. Without knowledge of the condition on the way, you wouldn’t be able to prevent contamination or damage before the consignment reaches the destination.
  5. Approximate ETA predictions at best — With multiple data streams coming in without verifiability, it is impossible to get accurate ETAs. Erroneous ETAs render data worthless for decision-making or logistics automation.
  6. Hurdles during Black Swan events — Failures in communication and collaboration could result in significant limitations for multimodal shipping management. During times of disruption, such as the recent pandemic or the Ever Given traffic pile-up at the Suez Canal, these failures become even more conspicuous and cause additional delays.

Carrier data aggregation platforms may be a good place to start, but they offer only a certain amount of value. Furthermore, not all carriers will have the same quality standards for collecting data; some would have different approaches, and some might not even have a proper visibility system. This makes the data unverifiable.

To break this chain of scattered visibility and non-uniform data quality, an approach that relies on first-hand data, with sensors, and without relying on the actors in the supply chain is used.

2. IoT Sensor Approach for Intermodal Shipment Tracking System

Cargo logistics tracking & monitoring solutions offer directly-collected, IoT-enabled sensor information from end to end.

As per Gartner’s 2021 ‘Gartner Tracking and Monitoring Business Process Context: Magic Quadrant for Real-Time Transportation Visibility Platforms’ report, “in real-time transportation visibility platforms (RTTVPs), the data is collected from the carrier rather than from independent IoT devices as in the case of tracking and monitoring solutions.” The report further states, “It can also extend the visibility beyond the delivery of the product and is often used to track the location and condition of the product in the yard or the warehouse.”

Data is more verifiable as an IoT sensor captures it without relying on the actors in the chain of custody. You also get end-to-end item-level tracking and condition in real-time through most of the journey.

Today, there is also technology to log condition data when connectivity doesn’t exist (such as over air or ocean) and automatically upload it to the cloud when connectivity resumes.

However, using a pure sensor data approach cannot always help with intermodal shipment tracking since it does not offer ease of visibility access.

Drawbacks

  1. Not all sensors are purpose-built for multimodal — Air shipments require a certain battery life, reporting intervals, and IATA/airline compliances, especially when it comes to sensitive pharma goods. Ocean shipments need batteries that last months or alternate charging options. Sensors must be able to cater to these use cases purposefully.
  2. Sensor ownership & management — Sensors are purchased or rented, but if you invest in sensors, you will need to manage the sensor inventory, utilize the sensors effectively, handle its reverse logistics, or pay a CapEx.
  3. Lack of visibility context makes it unactionable — Most sensor portals offer the location and condition trail but cannot verifiably predict in seconds if it will arrive on time, whether you need to act on a temperature rise, or if the security of the shipment is intact.

For example, knowing that a shipment is at the right airport is only half the story. Has it been shifted to the right bay? Has it boarded the right flight? Knowing these data points ahead of time can save hours or days in re-planning and re-routing cargo.

Therefore, sensor data plugs much of the gaps of carrier data aggregation, but it alone cannot enable decision-making, which is where the blended approach comes in.

3. Blended ‘Sensor + Non-Sensor’ Platform Approach

This approach combines purpose-built IoT sensors (the “physical”) with non-sensor intelligence (the “digital”) — blended on a real-time location-aware platform. It offers better context to sensor data and makes it more verifiable and actionable, enabling prompt decisions and logistics automation.

This approach offers better supply chain visibility than the carrier-based or pure sensor-based approach. The key to a verifiably better supply chain is to carefully pick the quality of the non-sensor digital streams to blend with the physical, often captured directly from the source.

If done right, blended sensor-driven signals offer end-to-end trust with:

  1. Verifiable visibility — To implement quick decisions, improve operational efficiency, and elevate the customer experience. For example, blending the digital aspect of port operations with verifiable sensor location and condition tells you if an FCL/LCL got loaded onto the right vessel, if it’s traveling in agreeable temperature/humidity, if it is secure, or if it is stuck in the customs clearance queue.
  2. Contextual visibility — SLAs (Service-Level Agreements) throughout the shipment’s journey can be assessed in real-time verifiably across routes, airport operations, port operations, delivery timelines, shipment conditions, documentation, past performance, current conditions, and chain of custody.
  3. Accurate signals — ETA calculations built on blended platform data can be verifiably better, and cold chain compliance of over 80 percent can be achieved.

In Summary

Real-time intermodal shipment monitoring is like virtually traveling with your shipment everywhere it goes, by truck, by rail, by air, or by the ocean, with minimal reliance on data from actors involved in the supply chain.

Blended sensor + non-sensor visibility & intelligence helps in strategic decision-making, ultimately meaning better supply chain visibility and better ROI. The system makes sure that the shipper doesn’t have to rely on unverifiable data from carriers nor spend time stitching together sensor data points to tell the entire story.

Tweet

Share

Share

Email

  • Supply Chain and Logistics
  • Asset Tracking
  • Data Analytics
  • Freight and Package Tracking
  • Remote Management

  • Supply Chain and Logistics
  • Asset Tracking
  • Data Analytics
  • Freight and Package Tracking
  • Remote Management

参考译文
以下是端到端多式联运运输跟踪系统的工作原理
插图:© IoT For All → 多式联运货物的运输正在以前所未有的速度发展,相应的运输监控技术,包括多式联运货物追踪系统,也在迅猛发展。整个行业在多式联运追踪方面形成了三种主要的方法:第一种是承运商数据聚合方法,第二种是物联网传感器方法,第三种是结合传感器与非传感器信息的混合方法。下面我们来探讨这三种方法在多式联运追踪中的应用。我们还将讨论这些方法在实现准时完整交付(OTIF)和多式联运运输中冷链合规方面的可视程度。 “多式联运显然是物流的未来,尤其是在运输距离不断增长的世界中。” — Roambee 点击推特 多式联运显然是物流的未来,尤其是在运输距离不断增长的世界中,如果你能够高效地管理多式联运运输,这将是一件非常好的事情。根据《全球多式联运货运运输市场报告(2020–2025)》,“多式联运能够提高30%的运输效率,减少10%的货物损坏,降低20%的运输成本,减少50%以上的公路拥堵,并促进三分之一以上的能源节约和减排。” 但这种指数级的增长也要求多式联运追踪系统在技术和效率方面同样迅速发展。 多式联运货物的非线性流动需要依靠公路、铁路、航空和海运的计划和非计划运输。在这些情况下,仅仅知道货物在订单层面的位置是不够的,还需要知道货物的确切位置和包装状况。准确的预计到达时间(ETA)预测和冷链合规也是处理多式联运货物时最重要的两个方面,而如今的大多数运输都涉及多种运输方式。要实现这一切,必须依靠完善部署的多式联运追踪系统。 得益于技术的进步,如今你可以追踪货物的整个运输过程。但这真的很容易吗?让我们首先通过追踪一票货物,了解多式联运运输有多复杂。 **一票多式联运货物的旅程** 让我们设想一个从马来西亚吉隆坡到美国芝加哥的LCL(拼箱)海运货物。 - 在吉隆坡市中心从发货人处提货。 - 运送到吉隆坡附近的集货仓库,与其他LCL拼箱。 - 再运送到另一个集货点进行集装箱化。 - 集装箱运送到最近的巴生港(Port Klang)海港。 - 在马来西亚巴生港进行报关和出口清关。 - 集装箱被放置在合适的位置,等待上船。 - 船舶抵达后,集装箱被装载并运往美国纽约港。 - 在吉隆坡和纽约之间,集装箱可能会在另一个港口中转。 - 到达纽约后,集装箱被卸下并放置在合适的位置,以等待进口清关流程。 - 在港口操作中,集装箱可能会多次移动以完成清关流程。 - 清关成功后,集装箱运送到进行拆箱的地点。 - 拆箱后,集装箱进行最后一公里配送,送往芝加哥并交付给收货人。 你将注意到,在这个例子中,多式联运货物至少在流程中被不同相关人员处理了十次。它通过三种不同的运输方式,至少经过五个中转点的进出,并至少进行两次拼箱和拆箱。在涉及多种运输方式、中转点和接触点的多式联运货物中,要实现端到端的可视化往往是困难的。更难的是,要确认货物是否按时、完好地到达目的地,尤其是当集装箱需要主动冷却时。因此,让我们来看看获取多式联运货物可视性的三种方法,它们是如何运作的,以及哪一种最适合多式联运货物。 1. **基于承运商数据聚合的多式联运追踪方法** 实时运输可视化平台(RTTVPs)从承运商或运输商的远程信息处理设备、船舶、航班和其他众包数据源收集数据,以提供可视性。远程信息处理设备(主要为第一公里和最后一公里)通常由承运商或运输商拥有,并与可视化平台集成(如果有的话)。用户通常只需支付一小笔费用即可访问聚合平台;硬件上没有成本。 来自多个接触点的数据被汇总并在门户上展示,或通过API访问。 **缺点** 这是实现可视性的最简单方法,但也存在许多缺点。这些系统无法解决真实性、数据一致性以及可操作性问题,因为它们依赖供应链中多个参与者提供数据。以下是多式联运货物在获取端到端可视化时面临的几个挑战示例: - 可视性并非实时:ELD或远程信息处理数据是通过API聚合的,并不总是即时或反映当前状态的。 - 缺乏明确的首公里和末公里可视性:从多式联运运输商(MTOs)获得的信息通常是不完整的,也无法验证。有时这些信息是手动收集的,或者根本不可用,因此更加不可靠。 - 最多只提供订单级可视性:如果你在运输LCL货物或需要项目级信息,这些平台通常无法验证,因为大多数船舶和航空公司只在订单级别共享数据。 - 缺乏环境监测数据:数据是订单级、卡车级、船舶级或航班级的。如果没有运输过程中的环境信息,你就无法在货物到达目的地之前防止污染或损坏。 - 最多只能提供大致的ETA预测:由于来自多个数据流的信息缺乏验证,获得准确的ETA是不可能的。错误的ETA会让数据无法用于决策或物流自动化。 - 在黑天鹅事件中的障碍:沟通和协作的失败可能导致多式联运运输管理的重大限制。在近期疫情或苏伊士运河“长范号”堵塞等中断时期,这些失败变得更加明显,并造成额外的延误。 承运商数据聚合平台可能是一个好的起点,但它只能提供一定程度的价值。此外,并非所有承运商都会以相同的标准收集数据;有些会有不同的方法,有些甚至没有完善的可视系统。这使得数据无法验证。 为了打破这个碎片化可视性和非统一数据质量的链条,采用了一种依赖第一手数据、使用传感器,并不依赖供应链参与者的方法。 2. **基于物联网传感器的多式联运追踪方法** 货运物流追踪与监控解决方案提供端到端的、物联网驱动的传感器信息。根据Gartner 2021年“Gartner追踪与监控业务流程背景:实时运输可视化平台魔力象限”报告,“在实时运输可视化平台(RTTVPs)中,数据来源于承运商的远程信息处理设备。” 该方法利用物联网传感器(“物理”)与非传感器智能(“数字”)——结合在一个实时位置感知平台上。它为传感器数据提供了更好的背景信息,使其更具验证性和可操作性,从而促进快速决策和物流自动化。这种方法比基于承运商或纯传感器的方法提供更好的供应链可视性。 实现真正更优的供应链的关键是,精心挑选非传感器数字流的质量,与直接从源头捕获的物理信号结合。如果做得好,混合传感器驱动的信号可以提供端到端的信任: - **可验证的可视性**:用于做出快速决策、提高运营效率并提升客户体验。例如,将港口运营的数字部分与可验证的传感器位置和状态结合,你可以知道FCL/LCL是否被装载到正确的船上,是否在适宜的温湿度下运输,是否安全,或者是否卡在清关队列中。 - **情境可视性**:在运输过程中的服务级别协议(SLAs)可以在路线、机场运营、港口操作、交付时间表、运输条件、文件、过去表现、当前状况和所有权链上进行实时验证。 - **准确信号**:基于混合平台数据的ETA计算可以得到可验证的提高,并可实现超过80%的冷链合规。 **总结** 实时多式联运追踪就像是与你的货物一起虚拟地走遍它去的每一个地方,无论通过卡车、铁路、航空还是海洋,对供应链参与者的数据依赖最小。混合的传感器+非传感器可视性和智能有助于战略决策,最终意味着更好的供应链可视性和更高的投资回报率。该系统确保发货人不必依赖承运商的不可验证数据,也不必花时间缝合传感器数据点来讲述完整的故事。
您觉得本篇内容如何
评分

评论

您需要登录才可以回复|注册

提交评论

广告
提取码
复制提取码
点击跳转至百度网盘