Centralized versus Decentralized Control of Internal Transport, a Case Study

  • René de Koster
  • J. Robert van der Meer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems book series (LNE, volume 460)


Since the introduction of wireless truck terminals and the translation of this technology in material handling control systems, a new control area has emerged in the control of such trucks. In this paper special attention is devoted to Fork Lift Trucks (FLTs) with wireless truck terminals which are controlled by a central Warehouse Management System (WMS). In order to justify investments in wireless truck terminals, it is necessary to specify the reduction in the number of vehicles needed and to indicate the impact on response times and throughput times. This is investigated for the case of a distribution center, where a wireless truck terminal system has been introduced. Two situations have been compared via simulation: decentralized conventional control (without mobile terminals) and centralized control with a WMS using so-called work lists. It is shown that, a centralized control system outperforms the conventional control systems. Such a system leads to a 29% reduction of the number of FLTs needed, and a simultaneous reduction in pallet response times. Furthermore, warehouse performance is almost insensitive to the structure of the work lists when centralized control systems with work lists are used.


Vehicle control forklift truck warehousing work lists 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bartholdi ΙΠ, J.J. and Platzman, L.K. (1989): Decentralized Control of Automated Guided Vehicles on a Simple Loop, in: IIE Transactions, Vol. 21, No. 1, 76–81Google Scholar
  2. Bischak, D.P. and Stevens, K.B., Jr (1995): An evaluation of the tandem configuration automated guided vehicle system, in: Production Planning & Control, Vol. 6, No. 5, 438–444Google Scholar
  3. Bozer, Y A. and Cho, M. and Srinivasan, M M. (1994): Expected waiting times in single-device trip-based material handling systems, in: European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 75, 200–216Google Scholar
  4. Bozer, Y.A. and Srinivasan, M.M. (1991): Tandem configurations for automated guided vehicle systems and the analysis of single vehicle loops, in: IIE Transactions, Vol. 23, No. 1, 72–82Google Scholar
  5. De Koster, R. and Van der Poort, E. and Roodbergen, K.J. (1997): When to apply optimal or heuristic routing of orderpickers, in: Advances in Distribution Logistics, (Springer) BerlinGoogle Scholar
  6. Johnson, M.E. and Brandeau, M.L. (1993): An analytical model for design of a multi vehicle automated guided vehicle system, in: Management Science, Vol. 39, No. 12, 1477–1489Google Scholar
  7. Kodali, R. (1997): Knowledge-based systems for selection of an AGV and a workcentre for transport of a part in on-line scheduling of FMS, in: Production Planning & Control, Vol. 8, No. 2, 114–122Google Scholar
  8. Mantel, R.J. and Landeweerd, R.A. (1995): Design and operational control of an AGV system, in: Graves, R.J., McGinnis, L.F., Medeiros, D.J., Ward, R.E., and Wilhelm, M.R. (eds.), Progress in Material Handling Research: (1994), pp.309–323, ISSN: 1080–711X.Google Scholar
  9. Srinivasan, M.M. and Bozer, Y.A. and Cho, M. (1994): Trip-based material handling systems: throughput capacity analysis, in: IIE Transactions, Vol. 26, No. 1, 70–89Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • René de Koster
    • 1
  • J. Robert van der Meer
    • 1
  1. 1.Rotterdam School of ManagementErasmus University RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations