Shell Ying Huang
Wen Jing Hsu
Abstract
Hub ports need to ensure that their navigational networks can fulfill increased demand in marine traffic. They also need to assess the possible impacts of an accident resulting in partial or complete closure of navigation channels. For lack of adequate analytical tools, modeling and simulation are the only means for such studies. To date, however, no adequate simulation tool exists for modeling and simulating the complex traffic at a large-scale hub port. The challenge is to efficiently model the large number of interacting vessels while accurately reflecting the navigational behaviors of various types of vessels whose movements must comply with prevailing protocols in a location- and situation-aware fashion. We present a systematic approach that enables the construction of a marine traffic simulation system called MTSS. MTSS was calibrated based on detailed analysis of historical records obtained from a major hub port, and it was validated by the domain experts. MTSS was used in a capacity study of marine traffic at a hub port that is unique in the scale and complexity of its waterway networks, the intricacies of its traffic patterns, and the required accuracy of the navigational behaviors of different types of vessels. The usefulness of MTSS is further demonstrated by applying it to assess the impacts of partial closure of a waterway under an emergency scenario. For large-scale hub ports, MTSS now opens up new possibilities of realistic scenario studies and disruption management.
Supplemental Material
Available for Download
Supplemental movie, appendix, image and software files for, MTSS -- A Marine Traffic Simulation System and Scenario Studies for a Major Hub Port
- A. Almaz and T. Altiok. 2012. Simulation modeling of the vessel traffic in Delaware River: impact of deepening on port performance. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 22 (2012), 146--165.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- M. C. ter Brake, E. (W. H.) van Iperen, D. Looije, and Y. Koldenhof. 2015. Unmanned ship simulation with real-time dynamic risk index. Scientific Journals of the Maritime University of Szczecin 43, 115 (2015), 48--54.Google Scholar
- E. Brockfeld, R. D. Kuhne, and P. Wagner. 2004. Calibration and validation of microscopic traffic flow models. In Transportation Research Record (TRB) 2004 Annual Meeting (2004). DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/1876-07Google Scholar
- L. Chu, H. X. Liu, J. Oh, and W. Recker. 2004. A calibration procedure for microscopic traffic simulation. In Transportation Research Record (TRB) 2004 Annual Meeting (2004). http://www.its.uci.edu/∼lchu/documents/TRB2004-calibration.pdf.Google Scholar
- B. A. Colley, R. G. Curtis, and C. T. Stockel. 1983. Maneuvering times, domains and arenas. The Journal of Navigation 36 (1983), 324--328.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. D. Colwill, D. Wignall, and I. Dand. 2004. The applications of marine risk simulation to the nearcasting and prevention of collision incidents. In Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Vessel Traffic Services (2004). 53--62.Google Scholar
- P. Cortes, J. Munuzuri, J. Nicolas Ibanez, and J. Guadix. 2007. Simulation of freight traffic in the Seville Inland port. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 15 (2007), 256--271.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. V. Davis, M. J. Dove, and C. T. Stockel. 1980. A computer simulation of marine traffic using domains and arenas. The Journal of Navigation 33 (1980), 215--222.Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. Degré and X. Lefèvre. 1981. A collision avoidance system. The Journal of Navigation 34 (1981), 294--302.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. R. van Dorp, J. R. W. Merrick, J. R. Harrald, T. A. Mazzuchi, and M. Grabowski. 2001. A risk management procedure for the Washington state ferries. Risk Analysis 21, 1 (2001), 127--142.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. Eberly. 2001. Intersection of Convex Objects: The Method of Separating Axes. http://www.geometrictools.com/Documentation/MethodOfSeparatingAxes.pdf. (2001)Google Scholar
- H. Fan and J.-M. Cao. 2000. Sea space capacity and operation strategy analysis system. Transportation Planning and Technology 24, 1 (2000), 49--63.Google ScholarCross Ref
- L. A. G. Franzese, L. O. Abdenur, R. C. Botter, D. Starks, and A. R. Cano. 2004. Simulating the Panama Canal: Present and future. In Proceedings of the 2004 Winter Simulation Conference (2004). Vol. 2. 1835--1838. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Frima. 2004. Capacity study for the Rio de la Plata waterway, Argentina. Master's thesis, Delft University of Technology, 2004.Google Scholar
- Y. Fujii and K. Tanaka. 1971. Studies in marine traffic engineering: Traffic capacity. The Journal of Navigation 24 (1971), 543--552.Google ScholarCross Ref
- F. Goerlandt, J. Montewka, E. S. Ravn, M. Hänninen, and A. Mazaheri. Analysis of the near-collisions using AIS data for the selected locations in the Baltic Sea, http://efficiensea.org/files/mainoutputs/wp6/d_wp6_2_03.pdf.Google Scholar
- J. Golkar, A. Shekhar, and S. Buddhavarapu. 1998. Panama canal simulation model. In Proceedings of the 30th Winter Simulation Conference (1998), 1229--1238. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Hasegawa. 1993. Knowledge-based automatic navigation system for harbour maneuvering. In Proceedings of the 10th Ship Control Systems Symposium (1993), 67--90.Google Scholar
- K. Hasegawa, G. Tashiro, S. Kiritani, and K. Tachikawa. 2002. Intelligent marine traffic simulator for congested waterways. In Proceedings of International Symposium for Young Researchers on Modeling and Their Applications (2002), 181--186.Google Scholar
- K. Hasegawa. 2004. Some recent developments of next generation's marine traffic systems. In Proceedings of IFAC Conference on Control Applications in Marine Systems (2004). 13--18.Google ScholarCross Ref
- K. Hasegawa and M. YamaZaki. 2013. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of congested marine traffic environment -- an application using marine traffic simulation system. The International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation 7, 2 (2013), 179--184.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Y. Huang, W. J. Hsu, and Y. He. 2011. Assessing capacity and improving utilization of anchorages. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 47, 2 (2011), 216--227.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Y. Huang, W. J. Hsu, H. Fang, and T. Song. 2013. A marine traffic simulation system for hub ports. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSIM Conference on Principles of Advanced Discrete Simulation (2013). 295--304. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Huet, T. Osman, and C. Ray. 2003. Modeling traffic navigation network with a multi-agent platform. In Proceedings of 17th European Simulation Multi-Conference - SCS Europe (2003), 111--117.Google Scholar
- W. Hürsch and C. V. Lopes. 1995. Separation of Concerns. Technical Report NU-CCS-95-03. Northeastern University, Boston, February 1995.Google Scholar
- Y. Iijima and H. Hagiwara. 1991. Results of collision avoidance maneuver experiments using a knowledge-based autonomous piloting system. The Journal of Navigation 44 (1991), 194--204.Google ScholarCross Ref
- N. Ince and E. Topuz. 2004. Modeling and simulation for safe and efficient navigation in narrow waterways. The Journal of Navigation 57(1) (2004), 53--71.Google Scholar
- International Association of Lighthouse Authorities, IALA Guidelines on Risk Management, 2000. http://www.iala-aism.org/products/publications/4906091210/risk-management-1018.Google Scholar
- International Maritime Organization. 1972. COLREGS - International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, http://www.mar.ist.utl.pt/mventura/Projecto-Navios-I/IMO-Conventions%20(copies)/COLREG-1972.pdf (1972).Google Scholar
- International Maritime Organization. 1997. Interim Guideline for the Application of Formal Safety Assessment for the IMO Rule-Making Process, MSC/Circ.829 & MEPC/Circ.335, 1997.Google Scholar
- A GUIDE TO GOOD PRACTICE ON PORT MARINE OPERATIONS, March 2015 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/417662/guide-good-practice-marine-code.pdf.Google Scholar
- E. Kose, E. Basar, E. Demirci, A. Guneroglu, and S. Erkebay. 2003. Simulation of marine traffic in Istanbul strait. Simulation Modeling Practice and Theory 11 (2003), 597--608.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. D. C. Little. 1961. A proof for the queueing formula L = λw. Operations Research 16 (1961), 651--665. Google ScholarDigital Library
- MPA. http://www.mpa.gov.sg/sites/global_navigation/publications/port_statistics/port_statistics.page.Google Scholar
- CDR S. M. Neill. 2001. A Survey of Waterway Capacity and Policy Issues. Web Access: http://gulliver.trb.org/conferences/2001Waterway&Harbor/Neill.pdf, 2001.Google Scholar
- X. B. Olba, W. Daamen, T. Vellinga, and S. P. Hoogendoorn. 2015. Estimating port network traffic capacity. Scientific Journals of the Maritime University of Szczecin 42, 114 (2015), 45--53.Google Scholar
- J. J. Olstam, J. Lundgren, M. Adlers, and P. Matstoms. 2008. A framework for simulation of surrounding vehicles in driving simulators. ACM Transactions on Modelling and Computer Simulation 18, 3 (2008), Article No. 9. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Park and J. D. Schneeberger. 2003. Microscopic simulation model calibration and validation: Case study of VISSIM simulation model for a coordinated actuated signal system. In Transportation Research Record (TRB) 2003 Annual Meeting (2003). http://faculty.virginia.edu/brianpark/SimCalVal/Docs/trb03-microscopic-simulation-cal-val.pdf.Google Scholar
- Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses, Approach Channels: A Guide for Design, 1995.Google Scholar
- X. Qu and Q. Meng. 2012. Development and applications of a simulation model for vessels in the singapore straits. Expert Systems with Applications 39 (2012), 8430--8438. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rheinmetall, Maritime Simulation, http://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/en/rheinmetall_defence/systems_and_products/simulation_and_training/nautischesimulation/index.php.Google Scholar
- C. K. Tam, R. Bucknall, and A. Greig. 2009. Review of collision avoidance and path planning methods for ships in close range encounters. The Journal of Navigation 62 (2009), 455--476.Google ScholarCross Ref
- UNCTAD. 2015. Merchant fleet by flag of registration and by type of ship, annual, 1980-2015. http://unctadstat.unctad.org/wds/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=93, 2015.Google Scholar
- S. Watanabe, K. Hasegawa, and P. Rigo. 2008. Inland Waterway Traffic Simulator, COMPIT’2008, Edit. Rigo-Bertram, 2008.Google Scholar
- X. Zhu, H. Xu, and J. Lin. 2001. Domain and its model based on neural networks. The Journal of Navigation 54 (2001), 97--103.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- MTSS -- A Marine Traffic Simulation System and Scenario Studies for a Major Hub Port
Recommendations
A marine traffic simulation system for hub ports
SIGSIM PADS '13: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSIM Conference on Principles of Advanced Discrete SimulationEnsuring congestion-free marine traffic is crucial for hub ports in the world. For these hub ports, there has been increasing demand in marine transport. Therefore a capacity-assessment tool that models and simulates the navigational network, the ...
Istanbul Strait marine traffic simulation using multiple serially connected machinery concept
SCSC '09: Proceedings of the 2009 Summer Computer Simulation ConferenceIstanbul Strait is one of the most crowded, narrowest straits in the world. Even though the number of accidents has been decreased in recent years, the risk is still high. Simulation of marine traffic in Istanbul Strait is very important to be able to ...
Optimization of Hub-and-Spoke Maritime Network Considering Hub Port Failure
WSC '22: Proceedings of the Winter Simulation ConferenceAny abnormal situation of the hub port may bring adverse effects such as time waste and cost increase to the shipping company. This paper solves the hub-and-spoke shipping network transportation optimization problem in the case of partial failure and ...
Comments