Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T06:26:40.181Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Trajectory risk cognition of ship collision accident based on fusion of multi-model spatial data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 February 2022

Tao Liu ,
Shuo Wang ,
Zhengling Lei ,
Jinfeng Zhang  and
Xiaocai Zhang
Tao Liu
Affiliation:
College of Transport & Communications, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai, China. Hubei Key Laboratory of Inland Shipping Technology, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan, China. State Key Lab of CAD&CG, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Shuo Wang
Affiliation:
College of Transport & Communications, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai, China.
Zhengling Lei*
Affiliation:
College of Engineering Science and Technology, Shanghai Ocean University, Shanghai, China.
Jinfeng Zhang
Affiliation:
Hubei Key Laboratory of Inland Shipping Technology, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan, China.
Xiaocai Zhang
Affiliation:
Institute of High Performance Computing, Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, Singapore
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

When conducting accident analysis, the assessment of risk is one of the important links. Moreover, with regards to crew training, risk cognition is also an important training subject. However, most of the existing researches only rely on a single or a few data sources. It is necessary to fuse the collected multi-source data to obtain a more comprehensive risk evaluation model. There are few studies on the three-dimensional (3D) multi-modal data-fusion-based trajectory risk cognition. In this paper, a fuzzy logic-based trajectory risk cognition method is proposed based on multi-model spatial data fusion and accident data mining. First, the necessity of multi-model spatial data fusion is analysed and a data-fusion-based scene map is constructed. Second, a risk cognition model fused by multiple factors, multi-dimensional spatial calculations as well as data mining results is proposed, including a novel ship boundary calculation approach and newly constructed factors. Finally, a radar chart is used to illustrate the risk, and a risk cognition system is developed. Experiment results confirm the effectiveness of the method. It can be applied to train human operators of unmanned ship systems.

Keywords

ECDISmarine trafficnavigationoceantrajectory
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 75 , Issue 2 , March 2022 , pp. 299 - 318
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Royal Institute of Navigation

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bye, R. J. and Aalberg, A. L. (2018). Maritime navigation accidents and risk indicators: An exploratory statistical analysis using AIS data and accident reports. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 176, 174–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, J., Bian, W., Wan, Z., Yang, Z., Zheng, H. and Wang, P. (2019). Identifying factors influencing total-loss marine accidents in the world: Analysis and evaluation based on ship types and sea regions. Ocean Engineering, 191, 106495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chybicki, A., Kamiński, Ł., Lubniewski, Z., Bruniecki, K., Kulawiak, M., Da̧browski, J. and Moszyński, M. (2009). Geographic information system for remote integration of diverse under-water acoustic sensor data. Hydroacoustics, 12, 17–24.Google Scholar
Du, L., Goerlandt, F. and Kujala, P. (2020). Review and analysis of methods for assessing maritime waterway risk based on non-accident critical events detected from AIS data. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 200, 106933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, Y., Huang, L., Jiang, D. and Xu, X. (2018). Research on shipborne aided navigation system based on enhanced traffic environment perception. PLoS ONE, 13(10), e0206402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fischer, Y. and Bauer, A. (2010). Object-oriented Sensor Data Fusion for Wide Maritime Surveillance. 2010 International WaterSide Security Conference, Carrara, Italy.10.1109/WSSC.2010.5730244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujii, Y. and Tanaka, K. (1971). Traffic capacity. The Journal of Navigation, 24(4), 543–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goerlandt, F. and Kujala, P. (2011). Traffic simulation based ship collision probability modeling. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 96(1), 91–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, Y., Chen, L., Negenborn, R. R. and van Gelder, P. H. A. J. M. (2020). A ship collision avoidance system for human-machine cooperation during collision avoidance. Ocean Engineering, 217, 107913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, W. O. and Kim, C. J. (2018). Establishment of navigational risk assessment model combining dynamic ship domain and collision judgement model. Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety, 24(1), 36–42.10.7837/kosomes.2018.24.1.036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kujala, P., Hänninen, M., Arola, T. and Ylitalo, J. (2009). Analysis of the marine traffic safety in the Gulf of Finland. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 94(8), 1349–1357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kulawiak, M., Chybicki, A. and Moszynski, M. (2010). Web-based GIS as a tool for supporting marine research. Marine Geodesy, 33(2-3), 135–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lager, M. and Topp, E. A. (2019). Remote Supervision of an Autonomous Surface Vehicle Using Virtual Reality. 10th IFAC Symposium on Intelligent Autonomous Vehicles (IAV 2019), Gdansk, Poland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, G. and Wang, T. (2011). A new model for information fusion based on grey theory. Information Technology Journal, 10(1), 189–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Z., Wang, P., Zhang, J., Wang, Y. and Gong, B. (2007). Review of traffic accident reproduction technology and its developing trend. China Safety Science Journal, 17(4), 16–20.Google Scholar
Liu, T., Zhao, D. and Pan, M. (2014). Generating 3D depiction for a future ECDIS based on digital earth. The Journal of Navigation, 67(6), 1049–1068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, T., Zhao, D. P., Pan, M. Y. and Bai, K. (2015). Fusing multiscale charts into 3D ENC systems based on underwater topography and remote sensing image. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2015, 610750.Google Scholar
Liu, T., Zhao, D. and Pan, M. (2016). An approach to 3D model fusion in GIS systems and its application in a future ECDIS. Computers & Geosciences, 89, 12–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Losasso, F. and Hoppe, H. (2004). Geometry clipmaps: terrain rendering using nested regular grids. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 23(3), 769–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mao, Z., Yan, X., Chen, H., Chu, X. and Yuan, X. (2010). Overview on marine accident analysis and its research trends. China Safety Science Journal, 20(12), 86–92.Google Scholar
Maule, M., Comba, J. L., Torchelsen, R. and Bastos, R. (2014). Memory-optimized order-independent transparency with dynamic fragment buffer. Computers & Graphics, 38, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mittring, M. and GmbH, C. (2008). Advanced Virtual Texture Topics. ACM SIGGRAPH 2008 Games, 23–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montewka, J., Goerlandt, F. and Kujala, P. (2012). Determination of collision criteria and causation factors appropriate to a model for estimating the probability of maritime accidents. Ocean Engineering, 40, 50–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peng, Z., Wang, D., Lan, W., Sun, G. and Yan, L. (2012). Neural Adaptive Flocking Control of Networked Underactuated Autonomous Surface Vehicles in the Presence of Uncertain Dynamics. 31st Chinese Control Conference, Hefei, China.Google Scholar
Porathe, T. (2006). 3-D nautical charts and safe navigation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Gävle, Gävle, Sweden.Google Scholar
Qu, X., Meng, Q. and Suyi, L. (2011). Ship collision risk assessment for the Singapore Strait. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 43(6), 2030–2036.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rothblum, A. M. (2000). Human Error and Marine Safety. National Safety Council Congress and Expo, Orlando, FL, United States.Google Scholar
Smierzchalski, R. and Michalewicz, Z. (2000). Modeling of ship trajectory in collision situations by an evolutionary algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 4(3), 227–241.10.1109/4235.873234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swafford, N. T., Iglesias-Guitian, J. A., Koniaris, C., Moon, B., Cosker, D. and Mitchell, K. (2016). User, Metric, and Computational Evaluation of Foveated Rendering Methods. ACM Symposium on Applied Perception, New York, NY, United States.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, W. (2009). Conflation of geospatial vector data from sea chart and topographic map. Doctoral dissertation, Harbin Engineering University.Google Scholar
Uǧurlu, Ö., Köse, E., Yıldırım, U. and Yüksekyıldız, E. (2015). Marine accident analysis for collision and grounding in oil tanker using FTA method. Maritime Policy & Management, 42(2), 163–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, S. B., Zhang, Y. J. and Hu, X. (2021). Ship collision risk calculation method considering uncertainty of ship position prediction. Chinese Journal of Ship Research, 16(1), 114–120.Google Scholar
Weng, J. and Yang, D. (2015). Investigation of shipping accident injury severity and mortality. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 76, 92–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wu, H. (2013). Design of ship collision avoidance terminal based on AIS/Radar fused information. Doctoral dissertation, Harbin Engineering University.Google Scholar
Wu, B., Yip, T. L., Xie, L. and Wang, Y. (2018). A fuzzy-MADM based approach for site selection of offshore wind farm in busy waterways in China. Ocean Engineering, 168, 121–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, B., Yip, T. L., Yan, X. and Soares, C. G. (2019). Fuzzy logic based approach for ship-bridge collision alert system. Ocean Engineering, 187, 106152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, B., Cheng, T., Yip, T. L. and Wang, Y. (2020). Fuzzy logic based dynamic decision-making system for intelligent navigation strategy within inland traffic separation schemes. Ocean Engineering, 197, 106909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yan, X., Wu, B., Wang, Y. and Wei, X. (2015). Overview of development and current progress in maritime simulation research. Journal of System Simulation, 27(1), 13–28.Google Scholar
Zaman, M. B., Kobayashi, E., Wakabayashi, N. and Maimun, A. (2015). Risk of navigation for marine traffic in the Malacca Strait using AIS. Procedia Earth and Planetary Science, 14, 33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, D., Yan, X., Yang, Z., Wall, A. and Wang, J. (2013). Incorporation of formal safety assessment and Bayesian network in navigational risk estimation of the Yangtze River. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 118, 93–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, J. and Wu, C. (2004). Construction of the collision risk factor model. Journal of Ningbo University (NSEE), 17(1), 61–65.Google Scholar
Zhou, M., Ge, Q., Huang, X., Liu, Y. and Chen, J. (2013). A novel scheme of identifying navigational risks for marine intelligent traffic systems. Navigation of China, 36(04), 114–118+124.Google Scholar