Essentos
Use case | Intermodal terminal

How a high-density intermodal terminal moved from radio-based coordination to event-driven execution

Full operational digitization at a high-density intermodal terminal in Zaragoza: gate, yard, rail, weighing, EDI and external collaboration

The challenge of an intermodal terminal growing faster than its coordination

This high-density intermodal terminal in Zaragoza had reached an operating volume that exceeded its coordination tools. Part of the inventory was still tracked on paper, team communication depended on radio, and too many yard decisions were made without outbound visibility. The result was accumulated daily friction: avoidable repositioning, extended gate cycles and a growing administrative burden.

Essentos was deployed as the operating layer for the terminal, covering the complete flow from gate to dispatch: outbound-driven yard logic, rail priority, integrated weighing, stabilized EDI and a collaboration portal for actors without EDI connectivity. The operation moved from reactive to event-governed, with early validation and management focused on real exceptions.

Operating sequence on a real day
From late information to event-driven execution
Zaragoza Intermodal Event-based automation
Gate 08:06
Early validation
Prerequisites verified before gate access.
Yard 10:14
Outbound-driven inventory
Each unit placed according to its dispatch window.
Weighing 12:02
Weighing integrated into the flow
Weight data enters directly, without manual transcription.
Rail 15:40
Train makeup verified
Discrepancies resolved before moving.
Before
Fragmented coordination
paper radio no outbound visibility
With Essentos
Event-driven execution
automation pre-validation exception-based management
Outcome
Terminal with governable rhythm
repositioning reduced smooth coordination real capacity protected

Terminal operating context

The terminal handles containers in an intermodal regime, with truck inbound and outbound flow throughout the day and rail windows with committed schedules.

The bottleneck was neither equipment nor space. It was the lack of synchronization between information and execution. When data arrives late, the operation is disrupted at the highest-pressure moment: at the gate, in the yard, or just before closing a rail composition.

Observed operating outcomes

35% Gate cycle time
Reduction in gate cycle through early validation and automated weighing
90% Digital recording
Operations recorded with event and timestamp, eliminating paper and end-of-shift reconstruction
15% Yard repositioning
Fewer unproductive moves through outbound-driven placement logic

Results observed in this specific deployment. Actual improvement depends on volume, layout and each terminal's operating discipline.

Operating barriers identified during deployment

3 barriers · 3 operating solutions
A yard without placement logic and repositioning caused by lack of anticipation
A
Problem

Before deployment, the yard was being managed reactively. Without a reliable outbound view at the moment of receipt, containers were stacked wherever space was available instead of where logistics priority said they should go. That created an expensive pattern: when an urgent pickup or a rail composition appeared, the target unit could be buried at the bottom of a stack three, four, or even five high.

Accumulated effect

Every rehandle added minutes per unit and multiplied fuel use, wear, and cycle loss. Over the course of a month, the effect accumulated and reduced the yard's real capacity during high-pressure periods.

Uneven connectivity in a continuous-execution environment
B
Problem

The site had areas with uneven coverage, and that affected the continuity of operating records whenever the system depended on stable connectivity. In a terminal, that kind of interruption is not just an IT issue. It is a flow issue: if an event is not recorded on time, uncertainty appears and manual validation comes back into the process.

Operating response

Connectivity was reinforced through 5G to stabilize access to the systems and protect continuity at critical operating points. With stronger coverage, events are recorded consistently and the terminal avoids stoppages caused by weak signal.

Weighing disconnected from the operating flow
C
Problem

Weighing was a classic island: the data was born at the scale, but entered the system through manual transcription.

Impact

That human step was the source of administrative errors and unnecessary delays.

Response applied

The weighing hardware was integrated directly so the data could be captured, tied to the container, and linked to the operating flow without manual transcription.

Scope of the Essentos deployment

A full operating layer was deployed so the terminal could execute from a shared reference, from gate entry to dispatch, and so connectivity would drive execution instead of slowing it down.

1
Early validation and exception-focused management

The most significant change was anticipating issue detection. Instead of discovering problems with the truck already at the gatehouse, prerequisites were verified before access: incomplete data or inconsistencies were resolved in advance.

Operating result: Most of the flow advanced automatically, and the team could focus on real exceptions instead of routine checks.

2
Collaboration portal for actors without EDI connectivity

Not every carrier or external actor has EDI connectivity. The portal allowed them to reserve time slots, upload documentation and pre-register cargo without relying on paper or phone calls.

Operating result: One platform and one shared operating reference, for both EDI and non-EDI actors.

3
Stabilized EDI and connectivity with the external ecosystem

EDI messaging and event consistency were stabilized so that internal execution and the information reflected in the external ecosystem advanced in sync. This reduced discrepancies and eliminated recurring manual confirmations.

4
Outbound-driven yard and rail prioritization

With data available before placement, the yard stopped functioning as reactive storage and was organized by dispatch priority. Units with immediate departure were placed in fast-access zones, while longer-dwell units were positioned to avoid generating repositioning.

At the same time, the rail composition was aligned with real yard inventory, and discrepancies were detected before loading moves began.

Real operating change after deployment

  • The operation stopped depending on radio as its primary coordination system
  • The yard moved from operating without visibility to being organized by dispatch priority
  • Weighing was integrated into the operating flow and stopped being an isolated data point
  • Coordination with third parties stopped depending on emails, calls and repeated confirmations
  • The terminal gained control over its operating information and, with it, real visibility of its capacity

Does your intermodal terminal need this transformation?

If your terminal operates under yard pressure, demanding rail windows and fragmented external coordination, the leap is not expanding infrastructure. It is turning information into coordinated execution.

Related modules

Solution