Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T01:04:01.341Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Optimal Collision-Avoidance Manoeuvres to Minimise Bunker Consumption under the Two-Ship Crossing Situation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 October 2017

Kang Zhou ,
Jihong Chen  and
Xiang Liu
Kang Zhou
Affiliation:
(Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, USA)
Jihong Chen
Affiliation:
(College of Transport and Communications, Shanghai Maritime University, China)
Xiang Liu*
Affiliation:
(Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, USA)
*
(E-mail: xiang.liu@rutgers.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper optimises two-ship collision-avoidance manoeuvres accounting for both collision risk and fuel use. A collision-avoidance manoeuvring optimisation model is developed to minimise fuel consumption while assuring ships' operational safety. The model can optimally determine when to begin collision-avoidance actions, how to change courses, and what rudder angles are needed. A quantitative scenario simulation is developed to illustrate the model application. The methodology can be further developed to guide practical ship collision-avoidance manoeuvring decisions made under more operational scenarios. In particular, this research can contribute to the development of computer-aided collision-avoidance operations to improve the safety and energy efficiency of maritime transportation.

Keywords

Collision avoidanceOperational safetyOptimal fuel useShip crossing
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 71 , Issue 1 , January 2018 , pp. 151 - 168
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2017 

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

REFERENCES

Cockcroft, A. N., and Lameijer, J. N. F. (2003). Guide to the collision avoidance rules. Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
Davis, P.V., Dove, M.J. and Stockel, C.T. (1980). A Computer Simulation of Marine Traffic Using Domains and Arenas. The Journal of Navigation, 33(02), 215–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujii, Y. and Tanaka, K. (1971). Traffic Capacity. The Journal of Navigation, 24(04), 543–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, E.M. (1975). A Statistical Study of Ship Domains. The Journal of Navigation, 28(03), 328–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammer, A. and Hara, K. (1990). Knowledge Acquisition for Collision Avoidance Manoeuvres by Ship Handling Simulator.MARSIM & ICSM 90, International Conference for Marine Simulation and Ship Manoeuvrability, Japan, 245–252.Google Scholar
Hiraga, I., Furuhashi, T., Uchikawa, Y. and Nakayama, S. (1995). An Acquisition of Operator's Rules for Collision Avoidance Using Fuzzy Neural Networks. IEEE Transactions of Fuzzy systems, 3(3), 280–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hong, B. and Yang, L. (2012). Ship Handling. Dalian Maritime University Press, Dalian, China.Google Scholar
IMO, N. (2007). 53/13. Development of an E-Navigation Strategy. Report of the Correspondence Group on e-navigation, submitted by the United Kingdom. Sub-Committee on Safety of Navigation. International Maritime Organization, London, 20.Google Scholar
IMO. (1972). International Regulations For Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (COLREGS).Google Scholar
Jansson, J. and Gustafsson, F. (2008). A Framework and Automotive Application of Collision Avoidance Decision Making. Automatica, 44(1), 2347–2351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kao, S.L., Cheng, C. Y. and Chang, K. Y. (2007). A New Method of Collision Avoidance for Vessel Traffic Service. 2007 International Conference Maritime Technology, Barcelona.Google Scholar
Kwik, K.H. (1989). Calculation of Ship Collision Avoidance Manoeuvres: a Simplified Approach. Ocean Engineering, 16(5–6), 475–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Z. (2008). Research on Speed Loss During Ships' Turning. Master thesis: Dalian Maritime University, Dalian, China.Google Scholar
Merz, A.W. (1973). Optimal Evasive Manoeuvres in Maritime Collision Avoidance. Journal of the Institute of Navigation, 20(2), 144–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miloh, T. and Sharma, S.D. (1975). Maritime Collision Avoidance as a Differential Game. The 4th Ship Control Systems Symposium, 24 (116), The Hague, The Netherlands, 69–88.Google Scholar
Ronen, D. (1982). The Effect of Oil Price on the Optimal Speed of Ships. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 33(1), 1035–1040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sato, Y. and Ishii, H. (1998). Study of a Collision-Avoidance System for Ships. Control Engineering Practice, 6(1), 1141–1149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shimada, K., Mabuchi, S. and Hara, K. (1991). Identification of Operators' Judgement Rules of Danger in Collision Avoidance Manoeuvring of Ships. Process 7th Fuzzy System Symposium, 509–512.Google Scholar
Smierzchalshi, R. and Michalewica, Z. (2000). Modeling of Ship Trajectory in Collision Situations by an Evolutionary Algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 4(3), 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Su, C.M., Chang, K.Y. and Cheng, C.Y. (2012). Fuzzy Decision on Optimal Collision Avoidance Measures for Ships in Vessel Traffic Service. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 20(1), 38–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsou, M.C. and Hsueh, C.K. (2010). The study of Ship Collision Avoidance Route Planning by Ant Colony Algorithm. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 18(5), 746–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Amerongen, J., and Van Nauta Lemke, H. R. (1978). Optimum steering of ships with an adaptive autopilot (No. Proceeding). Delft University of Technology.Google Scholar
Vincent, T.L., Cliff, E.M., Grantham, W.J. and Peng, W.Y. (1972). A Problem of Collision Avoidance. EES series Report No.39, University of Arizona, Tucson, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Wang, N. (2010). An Intelligent Spatial Collision Risk Based on the Quaternion Ship Domain. The Journal of Navigation, 63(04), 733–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, N., Meng, X., Xu, Q. and Wang, Z. (2009). A Unified Analytical Framework for Ship Domains. The Journal of Navigation, 62(04), 643–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, S. and Meng, Q. (2012). Sailing Speed Optimization for Container Ships in a Linear Shipping Network. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 48(3), 701–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., Debnath, A.K. and Chin, H.C. (2010). Modeling Collision Avoidance Decisions in Navigation. In Proceeding of 10th Asian Conference on Marine Simulation and Simulator Research, Taiwan.Google Scholar
Wang, S., Meng, Q. and Liu, Z. (2013). Bunker consumption optimization methods in shipping: A critical review and extensions. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 53, 49–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, J. and Chen, S. (2013). Marine Navigation. Dalian Maritime University Press, Dalian, China.Google Scholar
Zhao, J., Tan, M., Price, W.G. and Wilson, P.A. (1994). DCPA Simulation Model for Automatic Collision Avoidance Decision Making Systems Using Fuzzy Sets. Proceeding of Oceans Engineering for Today's Technology and Tomorrow's Preservation, 2, Brest, 244–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, D. (2002). A Survey on Ship Collision Risk Evaluation. The Journal of Dalian Maritime University, 28(2), 14–17.Google Scholar