Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Estimation of vessel collision frequency in the Yangtze River estuary considering dynamic ship domains

  • Original article
  • Published:
Journal of Marine Science and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With the Automatic Identification System (AIS) data collected from Donghai Navigation Safety Administration, this study aims to estimate vessel collision frequency in the Yangtze River estuary water areas considering dynamic ship domain sizes. To take into account the possible impacts of ship type, time of the day, and ship relative speed, ship domain size is further modeled as linear functions of these influencing factors based on our questionnaire survey data. Ship results reveal that the calculated vessel collision frequency in the Yangtze River estuary water areas is about 4.29 × 10−3 per ship-year, in which cargo ships have the highest vessel collision frequency, while fishing ships have the lowest frequency. Moreover, head-on collision is the collision type that has the largest collision frequency, followed by overtaking collision and crossing collision in the Yangtze River estuary. Big-sized vessels (e.g., Container ship and Cargo ship) are more likely to encounter head-on collisions, while the majority of small vessels (e.g., Fishing ship and Passenger ship) involved in overtaking collisions. Because of higher vessel traffic flow and density, the daytime period is associated with a larger vessel collision frequency, as compared with the nighttime period.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Weng J, Yang D, Chai T, Fu S (2019) Investigation of Occurrence Likelihood of Human Errors in Shipping Operations. Ocean Eng 182:28–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Wang Y, Zhang J, Chen X, Chu X, Yan X (2013) A spatial-temporal forensic analysis for inland-water ship collisions using AIS data. Saf Sci 57:187–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Weng J, Li G, Chai T, Yang D (2018) Evaluation of two-ship collision severity using ordered probit approaches. J Navig 71(2018):822–836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Weng J, Li G (2019) Exploring Shipping Accident Contributory Factors using Association Rules. J Transp Saf Secur 11(1):36-57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fujii Y, Yamanouchi H, Mizuki N (1970) On the fundamental of marine traffic control. Part I: probability of collision and evasive actions. Electron Navig Res Ins Pap 2(1):1–16

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fujii Y, Yamanouchi H, Mizuki N (1974) Some factors affecting the frequency of accidents in marine traffic. II: the probability of stranding, III: the effect of darkness on the probability of stranding. J Navig 27(2):239–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. MacDuff T (1974) The Probability of Vessel Collision. Ocean Ind 9(1):144–148

    Google Scholar 

  8. Pedersen P (1995) Collision and grounding mechanics. In: Proceedings of WEGEMT’95, Copenhagen, vol 1, pp 125–157

  9. Kujala P, Hänninen M, Arola T (2009) Analysis of the marine traffic safety in the Gulf of Finland. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 94(8):1349–1357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Merrick JRW, van Dorp JR, Harrald J, Mazzuchi T, Spahn J, Grabowski M (2000) A systems approach to managing oil transportation risk in Prince William Sound. Syst Eng 3(3):128–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Pedersen P (2002) Collision risk for fixed offshore structures close to high-density shipping lanes. J Eng Marit Environ 216(1):29–44

    Google Scholar 

  12. Montewka J, Hinz T, Kujala P (2010) Probability modeling of vessel collisions. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 95(5):573–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Montewka J, Hinz T, Kujala P, Matusiak J (2010) Probability Modelling of Vessel Collisions. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 95:573–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fujii Y, Tanaka K (1971) Traffic Capacity. J Navigat 24(4):543–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Goodwin E (1975) A statistical study of ship domains. J Navig 28(3):328–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Liu J, Zhou F, Li Z, Wang M, Liu RW (2016) Dynamic ship domain models for capacity analysis of restricted water channels. J Navig 69(3):481–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Goerlandt F, Montewka J, Zhang W, Kujala P (2017) An analysis of ship escort and convoy operations in ice conditions. Saf Sci 95:198–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Weng J, Meng Q, Qu X (2012) Vessel collision frequency estimation in the Singapore strait. J Navig 65(1):207–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Goerlandt F, Kujala P (2011) Traffic Simulation Based Ship Collision Probability Modeling. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 96:91–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Graveson A (2004) AIS-an Inexact Science. J Navig 57:339–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Norris A (2007) AIS Implementation- Success or Failure. J Navig 60:7–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rino B, Ljupko S, Zvonko K (2012) Automatic Identification System in Maritime Traffic and Error Analysis. Transact Marit Sci 2:77–84

    Google Scholar 

  23. Jingsong Z, Zhaolin W, Fengchen W (1993) Comments on Ship Domains. J Navig 46:422–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang N, Meng X, Xu Q, Wang Z (2009) A unified analytical framework for ship domains. J Navig 62:643–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Szlapczynski R (2006) A unified measure of collision risk derived from the concept of a ship domain. J Navig 61:477–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mou JM, Tak C, Ligteringen H (2010) Study on collision avoidance in busy waterways by using AIS data. Ocean Eng 37:483–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pietrzykowski Z (2008) Ship’s fuzzy domain: a criterion for navigational safety in narrow fairways. J Navig 61(3):499–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Pietrzykowski Z, Uriasz J (2009) The ship domain: a criterion for navigational safety assessment in an open sea area. J Navig 62(1):93–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Navigation, Jimei University, Xiamen, China

    Tian Chai

  2. College of Transport and Communications, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai, 201306, China

    Jinxian Weng & Guorong Li

Authors
  1. Tian Chai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jinxian Weng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guorong Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jinxian Weng.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Ship domain questionnaire survey.

figure a
figure b
figure c

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chai, T., Weng, J. & Li, G. Estimation of vessel collision frequency in the Yangtze River estuary considering dynamic ship domains. J Mar Sci Technol 25, 964–977 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00773-019-00693-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00773-019-00693-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation