Difference between revisions of "Improved Decisions for Ocean FreightsAnalysis"
Mmphang.2012 (talk | contribs) |
Mmphang.2012 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 93: | Line 93: | ||
The cumulative distribution graph shows us the percentage of transactions of a company that is below a certain utilization rate. For example in the above graph, the red company is of greater concern as a high proportion of their transactions have low utilization rates. | The cumulative distribution graph shows us the percentage of transactions of a company that is below a certain utilization rate. For example in the above graph, the red company is of greater concern as a high proportion of their transactions have low utilization rates. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |} | ||
+ | |||
+ | <br /> | ||
+ | {| style="background-color:#ffffff; width:80%; font-family:Century Gothic; font-size:15px; margin: 3px auto 0 auto;" | | ||
+ | | style="background-color:#006600; ; color:#ffffff; text-align: center; border-top:solid #ffffff; border-bottom:solid #ffffff; width:50%; " | | ||
+ | [[Improved_Decisions_for_Ocean_Freights|<span style="color:#ffffff"><strong>Time Series Percent Utilization</strong></span>]] | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |<br><center>[[File:RemovedAnomalies.png|800px]]</center> | ||
+ | |||
+ | For the top graph, some anomalies in the data are revealed and also implies wrong data around the month of June in 2013 and 2014 where percentage reached 400%, 3 times more than the limit of percentage utilization. To remove that dataset, we put a constraint on the axis such that only percentages between 0% and 100%, as can be seen in the bottom graph. | ||
|} | |} |
Revision as of 15:10, 30 September 2015
No clear relationship between shipper country and utilization rate |
![]() We see from the graph on the left that shipments originating from Chile, Singapore and the United States have the lowest utilization rates. However, we see from the graph on the right that shipments originating from Fiji, Italy and Estonia have the lowest utilization rates. As such, we are unable to see a clear relationship between the shipper country and utilization rates. |
No clear relationship between consignee country and utilization rate |
![]() With the same X-axis and Y-axis, that is Consignee Country and Average Percentage Utilization, we realise that are no similar trends between the 2 graphs of different industries (auto industry and engineering industry).
|
Underutilization could possibly be due to danger of goods involved |
![]() We attempted to analyse if the danger level of the goods affected the choice of container.
We can see from the graph above that 5 out of 6 industries underutilize the containers when dangerous goods are involved. However, we also realized that there are only 142 records of dangerous goods available, as compared to 82,649 records of non-dangerous goods. Due to the vast difference in numbers, we are not able to say with certainty that the danger level of the goods affects the ultimate container choice. |
Breakdown of average utilization by Industries for FCL and LCL |
![]()
Out of the 6 industries, it becomes apparent that, in the order of lowest utilization of FCL are:
As such, we would suggest focusing on Engineering companies first. |