A Study on Identification of Development Status of MASS Technologies and Directions of Improvement
Source abstract
Abstract
The introduction of the maritime autonomous surface ship (MASS) to the maritime industry will open up a new era and bring about a new paradigm shift in terms of cost efficiency, maritime accidents, and human resources. Various studies are currently being conducted to realize the MASS. Understanding the scope and direction of these studies will be of great help for future MASS research. In this study, the current development status of technologies for autonomous ships is identified, and considerations and directions of improvement are suggested for six major research fields that cover all technological issues of MASS. Firstly, the results of the regulatory scoping exercise (RSE) on the International Maritime Organization (IMO) conventions to accept MASSs are identified; in particular, human elements are identified as vital issues to be considered for the design and operation of MASSs. Secondly, various studies on the decision-making system are identified, and the future direction is suggested. Thirdly, in terms of ship design and propulsion system, design changes for autonomous cargo ships are investigated, with their potential impacts to be considered. Fourthly, the communication system will need to be robust and supported by multiple systems to minimize potential risk with third-party infrastructures, and suitable protection of systems, networks, and data will be required as an integral part of the safety system for cybersecurity. Fifthly, issues of maintenance and repair are identified, with a maintenance strategy to be considered. Lastly, hazard analysis of the autonomous ship is explored, and system-theoretic process analysis (STPA) and the functional resonance analysis method (FRAM) are identified as the most representative new methods that can be used for hazard analysis of autonomous ships.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Maritime Navigation and Safety · Maritime Transport Emissions and Efficiency · Marine and Coastal Research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Korea Institute of Maritime and Fisheries Technology (KIMFT), 367 Haeyang-ro, Busan 49111, Korea
Korea Center for International Maritime Safety Cooperation (KMC), 492 Hannuri-daero, Sejong 30103, Korea
Department of Maritime Operations, University of South-Eastern Norway (USN), 215 Raveien, 3184 Vestfold, Norway
References (77)
Show source-provided references
1. Bonwick, G. (1967). Automation in Ships. Automation on Shipboard, MacMillan and Company.10.1007/978-1-349-81726-9 ↗
2. Porathe, T., Burmeister, H.-C., and Rødseth, Ø.J. (2013, January 15–17). Maritime unmanned navigation through intelligence in networks: The MUNIN Project. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computer and IT Applications in the Maritime Industries, COMPIT’13, Cortona, Italy.
3. Tvete, H. (2015). ReVolt: The Unmanned, Zero Emission, Short Sea Ship of the Future, Dnv Gl Strategic Research & Innovation.
4. Kongsberg (2020, January 07). Autonomous Shipping. Available online: https://www.kongsberg.com/maritime/support/themes/autonomous-shipping/.
5. NYK (2020, January 14). NYK Conducts World’s First Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships Trial. Available online: https://www.nyk.com/english/news/2019/20190930_01.html.
6. Herald, T.K. (2019, December 17). South Korea Embarks on Ambitious Autonomous Ship Project. Available online: http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20191030000699.
7. YARA (2020, January 07). Yara Birkeland Press Kit. Available online: https://www.yara.com/news-and-media/press-kits/yara-birkeland-press-kit/.
8. IMO (2018). Regulatory Scoping Exercise for the Use of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS), IMO. MSC 99/WP.9.
9. IMO (2020). Summary of Results of the Second Step of the RSE for STCW Convention and Code. Regulatory Scoping Exercise for the Use of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS), IMO.
10. Ramos, M.A., Utne, I., and Mosleh, A. (2018, January 16–21). On factors affecting autonomous ships operators performance in a Shore Control Center. Proceedings of the 14th Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
11. Zhu, T., Haugen, S., and Liu, Y. (2019, January 22–26). Human Factor Challenges and Possible Solutions for the Operation of Highly Autonomous Ships. Proceedings of the 29th European Safety and Reliability Conference, Hannover, Germany.10.3850/978-981-11-2724-3_0554-cd ↗
12. Sharma, A., Kim, T., Nazir, S., and Chae, C. (2019, January 24–25). Catching up with time? Examining the STCW competence framework for autonomous shipping. Proceedings of the Ergoship Conference, Haugesund, Norway.
13. Perera, L.P. (2018, January 17–22). Autonomous ship navigation under deep learning and the challenges in COLREGs. Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, Madrid, Spain.10.1115/OMAE2018-77672 ↗
14. An artificial neural network based decision support system for energy efficient ship operations10.1016/j.cor.2015.04.004 ↗
15. Montewka, J., Wróbel, K., Heikkilä, E., Banda, O.A.V., Goerlandt, F., and Haugen, S. (2018, January 16–21). Challenges, solution proposals and research directions in safety and risk assessment of autonomous shipping. Proceedings of the 14th Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
16. Assessing ship risk model applicability to Marine Autonomous Surface Ships10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.07.040 ↗
17. Risk Assessment for an Unmanned Merchant Ship
18. IMO (2017). Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) Proposal for a Regulatory Scoping Exercise, IMO.
19. IMO (2020). Regulatory Scoping Exercise for the Use of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS), IMO. MSC 99/5.
20. IMO (2017). International Convention on Standard of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, IMO.
21. The Human Element and Autonomous Ships
22. Nava, G., and Fernanda, P.M. (2019). Legal Challenges of Liability in Collisions Arising from the Development of Autonomous and Unmanned Shipping—International and Norwegian Perspective. [Master’s Thesis, University of Oslo].
23. The human element in future Maritime Operations—Perceived impact of autonomous shipping10.1080/00140139.2019.1659995 ↗
24. Park, S., Park, Y., Park, J., and Thanh, N. (2015). PARK Model and Decision Support System based on Ship Operator’s Consciousness. Inf. Commun. Environ, 93–98.10.1201/b18514-13 ↗
25. Decision Support in Collision Situations at Sea10.1017/S0373463316000746 ↗
26. Towards a decision support system for maritime navigation on heavily trafficked basins10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.03.073 ↗
27. Fuzzy logic based decision making system for collision avoidance of ocean navigation under critical collision conditions10.1007/s00773-010-0106-x ↗
28. Zhang, R., and Furusho, M. (2016). Constructing a decision-support system for safe ship-navigation using a Bayesian network. International Conference on Digital Human Modeling and Applications in Health, Safety, Ergonomics and Risk Management, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-40247-5_62 ↗
29. A distributed anti-collision decision support formulation in multi-ship encounter situations under COLREGs10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.06.054 ↗
30. A new deterministic approach in a decision support system for ship’s trajectory planning10.1016/j.eswa.2016.11.005 ↗
31. Zhang, X., Wang, C., Liu, Y., and Chen, X. (2019). Chen Decision-Making for the Autonomous Navigation of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships Based on Scene Division and Deep Reinforcement Learning. Sensors, 19.10.3390/s19184055 ↗
32. On-board Decision Support System for Ship Flooding Emergency Response10.1016/j.procs.2014.05.154 ↗
33. Pennanen, P., Ruponen, P., and Ramm-Schmidt, H. (2015). Integrated Decision Support System for increased Passenger Ship Safety. Damaged SHIP III, Royal Institution of Naval Architects.10.3940/rina.ds.2015.07 ↗
34. A decision support system for mission-based ship routing considering multiple performance criteria10.1016/j.ress.2016.02.002 ↗
35. A decision support system for vessel speed decision in maritime logistics using weather archive big data10.1016/j.cor.2017.06.005 ↗
36. A bibliometric analysis and systematic review of shipboard Decision Support Systems for accident prevention10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104717 ↗
37. Rødseth, Ø. (2017). Towards Shipping 4.0. Proceedings of Smart Ship Technology, Royal Institution of Naval Architects.
38. Laurinen, M. (2016). Remote and Autonomous Ships: The Next Steps, AAWA: Advanced Autonomous Waterborne Applications.
39. Analyzing the economic benefit of unmanned autonomous ships: An exploratory cost-comparison between an autonomous and a conventional bulk carrier
40. DC-grid system for ships: A study of benefits and technical considerations
41. Design and control of hybrid power and propulsion systems for smart ships: A review of developments10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.02.060 ↗
42. Enhancing human performance in ship operations by modifying global design factors at the design stage10.1016/j.ress.2016.11.009 ↗
43. Survey on Communication and Networks for Autonomous Marine Systems10.1007/s10846-018-0833-5 ↗
44. Autonomous Driving in the iCity—HD Maps as a Key Challenge of the Automotive Industry10.1016/J.ENG.2016.02.010 ↗
45. Rødseth, Ø.J., and Lee, K. (2015, January 11–13). Secure communication for e-navigation and remote control of unmanned ships. Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Computer and IT Applications in the Maritime Industries-COMPIT, Ulrichshusen, Germany.
46. Schiaretti, M., Chen, L., and Negenborn, R.R. (2017, January 18–20). Survey on autonomous surface vessels: Part II—Categorization of 60 prototypes and future applications. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Logistics, Southampton, UK.10.1007/978-3-319-68496-3_16 ↗
47. Autonomous merchant vessels: Examination of factors that impact the effective implementation of unmanned ships10.1080/18366503.2016.1229244 ↗
48. Kavallieratos, G., Katsikas, S., and Gkioulos, V. (2018). Cyber-Attacks Against the Autonomous Ship. Computer Security, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-12786-2_2 ↗
49. IMO (2018). E-Navigation Strategy Implementation Plan—Update 1, IMO.
50. Leira, F.S., Johansen, T.A., and Fossen, T.I. (2015, January 7–14). Automatic detection, classification and tracking of objects in the ocean surface from UAVs using a thermal camera. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT, USA.10.1109/AERO.2015.7119238 ↗
51. Towards the assessment of potential impact of unmanned vessels on maritime transportation safety10.1016/j.ress.2017.03.029 ↗
52. Kujala, P., and Lu, L. (2018). Towards autonomous shipping: Operational challenges of unmanned short sea cargo vessels. Marine Design XIII, Taylor & Francis Group.10.1201/9781351010047 ↗
53. A study of reliability-centred maintenance in maritime operations10.1016/S0308-597X(02)00014-3 ↗
54. NASA (2000). Reliability-Centred Maintenance Guide for Facilities and Collateral Equipment, NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance.
55. Jones, R.B. (1995). Risk-Based Management: A Reliability-Centered Approach, Gulf Publishing Company.
56. DNV GL (2018). Remote-Controlled and Autonomous Ships in the Maritime Industry, DNV GL-Maritime. Group Technology and Research, Position Paper.
57. Maritime casualties analysis as a tool to improve research about human factors on maritime environment
58. Dhillon, B.S. (2007). Human Reliability and Error in Transportation Systems, Springer Science & Business Media.
59. Utne, I.B., Sørensen, A.J., and Schjølberg, I. (2017, January 25–30). Risk Management of Autonomous Marine Systems and Operations. Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, Trondheim, Norway.10.1115/OMAE2017-61645 ↗
60. Kim, H., Haugen, O.I., Rokseth, B., and Lundteigen, M.A. (2019, January 22–26). Comparison of Hazardous Scenarios for Different Ship Autonomy Types using Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis. Proceedings of the 29th European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL), Hannover, Germany.10.3850/978-981-11-2724-3_0813-cd ↗
61. Porathe, T., Hoem, Å., Rødseth, Ø., Fjørtoft, K., and Johnsen, S. (2018, January 17–21). At least as safe as manned shipping? Autonomous shipping, safety and “human error.” Safety and Reliability–Safe Societies in a Changing World. Proceedings of the ESREL 2018, Trondheim, Norway.10.1201/9781351174664-52 ↗
62. Rausand, M. (2013). Risk Assessment: Theory, Methods, and Applications, John Wiley & Sons.
63. Leveson, N. (2011). Engineering a Safer World, Systems Thinking Applied to Safety (Draft), MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/8179.001.0001 ↗
64. Hollnagel, E. (2013). FRAM, The Functional Resonance Analysis Method: Modelling Complex Socio-Technical Systems, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
65. Leveson, N.G., and Thomas, J.P. (2018). STPA Handbook, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
66. Toward a Method Evaluating Control Actions in STPA-Based Model of Ship-Ship Collision Avoidance Process10.1115/1.4042387 ↗
67. Preliminary Results of a System-theoretic Assessment of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships’ Safety
68. A systemic hazard analysis and management process for the concept design phase of an autonomous vessel10.1016/j.ress.2019.106584 ↗
69. Towards the development of a system-theoretic model for safety assessment of autonomous merchant vessels10.1016/j.ress.2018.05.019 ↗
70. Hollnagel, E. (2013). Resilience Engineering in Practice: A Guidebook, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
71. The use of Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM) in a mid-air collision to understand some characteristics of the air traffic management system resilience10.1016/j.ress.2011.05.009 ↗
72. The Functional Resonance Analysis Method for a systemic risk based environmental auditing in a sinter plant: A semi-quantitative approach10.1016/j.eiar.2016.12.002 ↗
73. Chaal, M., Banza, O.A.V., Basnet, S., Hirdaris, S.E., and Kujala, P. (2019, January 17–20). An initial hierarchical systems structure for systemic hazard analysis of autonomous ships. Proceedings of the International Seminar on Safety and Security of Autonomous Vessels (ISSAV) and European STAMP Workshop and Conference (ESWC) 2019, Sciendo, Finland.10.2478/9788395669606-012 ↗
74. Basnet, S., Banda, O.A.V., and Hirdaris, S.E. (2019, January 11–13). The management of risk in autonomous marine ecosystems–Preliminary ideas. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Autonomous Systems Safety, Trondheim, Norway.
75. Relling, T., Lützhöft, M., Ostnes, R., and Hildre, H.P. (2018). A Human Perspective on Maritime Autonomy. International Conference on Augmented Cognition, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-91467-1_27 ↗
76. Basnet, S., Banza, O.A.V., Chaal, M., Hirdaris, S.E., and Kujala, P. (2019, January 17–20). Comparison of system modelling techniques for autonomous ship systems. Proceedings of the International Seminar on Safety and Security of Autonomous Vessels (ISSAV) and European STAMP Workshop and Conference (ESWC) 2019, Sciendo, Finland.10.2478/9788395669606-011 ↗
77. Hoem, A.S. (2019, January 22–26). The present and future of risk assessment of MASS: A literature review. Proceedings of the 29th European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL), Hannover, Germany.10.3850/978-981-11-2724-3_0657-cd ↗