Risk calculation project Jon-Arve Ryset Helsinki, 13.06.2017 Vi - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

Risk calculation project

Jon-Arve Røyset

Helsinki, 13.06.2017

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

Existing and future models

Spes. analysis Mitigation measures VTS

Probability system

AIS data Ship register Geo boundaries Reports Data export Web and BI- presentation Havbas e Supporting tables Environ- mental risk Other Safe Seanet, PEC Agr. Meteorology Pilot - DNV GL Veracity

• Data mangement, data quality, harmonization, ...

Data marts Data marts Data marts Data marts

Accidents DSS,Dama,SD

• Establish a long-term data

collection for the analysis of probability of ship accidents in Norwegian waters

• Trend analysis
• Uniform data

Risk module

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

Results and deliveries

With the help of the system, one can easily provide overviews and reports in relation to:

• Ship activity and trends in

Norwegian sea areas

• Change in ship activity
• Probability of accidents and oil

spill

• Changes in likelihood of

accidents and oil spill

• Overview of accident types
• Use of pilot related to accidents
• Everything presented through a

common web interface

• Develop method report – open

risk

Risk level trends

Stakeholders: NCA, other Norwegian authorities, public? Purpose: To monitor trends in risk level in Norwegian waters and report as appropriate. Goal:

To be able to identify risk level trends as the basis for further analyzes and to take expedient actions if needed.

[ LI J1]

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

KV.B, KV.S, NA, Public? To clearly highlight rate of change in the risk level based on set criteria To be able to easily generate risk maps with main changes - short/long term planning

2008 2040 Vessel type Risk type Green – Increased risk Red – Decreased risk 2040 Vessel type Risk type Region 2040 2008 2040

• 1. < 1000

GT

• 2. 1000 -

4999 GT

• 3. 5000 -

9999 GT

• 4. 10000 -

24999 GT

• 5. 25000 -

49999 GT

• 6. 50000 -

99999 GT

• 7. >=

100000 GT 01 Oljetankere 1 % 2 % 0 % 1 % 2 % 7 % 0 % 02 Kjemikalie- /produkttankere 1 %

• 9 %

3 % 7 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 03 Gasstankere 0 % 3 % 1 % 1 % 1 % 0 % 1 % 04 Bulkskip 1 %

• 3 %
• 2 %
• 7 %

1 % 2 % 0 % 05 Stykkgodsskip 1 % 7 % 6 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 06 Konteinerskip 0 % 0 % 4 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 07 Ro Ro last 0 % 2 % 2 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 08 Kjøle-/fryseskip 0 % 8 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 09 Passasjer 2 % 8 % 5 % 6 % 4 % 3 % 1 % 10 Offshore supply skip skip 1 %

• 5 %
• 7 %

0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 11 Andre offshore service 3 %

• 1 %

1 % 2 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 12 Andre aktiviteter 2 % 1 % 3 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 13 Fiskefartøy

• 4 %
• 4 %

1 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %

2009 2015 Date1 Date 2

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

UC-1,9 KV.B, KV.S, NA, Public? To identify the high and low risk for spill areas in Norwegian waters To identify the high and low risk for spill areas in Norwegian waters

2008 2040 Vessel type Fuel/Cargo type

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

UC-1,4 KV.B, KV.S, NA, Public? Monitor trends in reported accidents and present results in multiple ways In order to be able to identify trends and take expedient actions

Number of accidents within each cell 2008 2040 Vessel type Accident type

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

UC-1,6 KV.B, KV.S, NA, Public? Monitor trends in reported accidents with oil spill and present results in multiple ways In order to be able to identify trends and take expedient actions

Number of accidents with oil spill within each cell / Oil spill volume 2008 2040 No./Volume Vessel type Fuel/Cargo type

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

UC-1,5 KV.B, KV.S, NA, Public? Monitor trends in reported accidents with resulting injury

• r loss of life

In order to be able to identify trends and take expedient actions

2008 2040 Vessel type injuries/fatalities 2008 2010 2015 2020 2040 2030 Number of accidents with resulting injury or loss of life for respective cell injuries/fatalities 2008 2010 2015 2020 2040 2030 Number of accidents with resulting injury or loss of life for region injuries/fatalities region

Oljetankere Kjemikalie-/produkttankere Gasstankere Bulkskip Stykkgodsskip Konteinerskip Ro Ro last Kjøle-/fryseskip Passasjer Offshore supply skip Andre offshore service skip Andre aktiviteter Fiskefartøy

2008 2040 Number of accidents with resulting injury or loss of life for region region

• 1. < 1000

GT

• 2. 1000 -

4999 GT

• 3. 5000 -

9999 GT

• 4. 10000 -

24999 GT

• 5. 25000 -

49999 GT

• 6. 50000 -

99999 GT

• 7. >=

100000 GT 01 Oljetankere 1 % 2 % 0 % 1 % 2 % 7 % 0 % 02 Kjemikalie- /produkttankere 1 %

• 9 %

3 % 7 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 03 Gasstankere 0 % 3 % 1 % 1 % 1 % 0 % 1 % 04 Bulkskip 1 %

• 3 %
• 2 %
• 7 %

1 % 2 % 0 % 05 Stykkgodsskip 1 % 7 % 6 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 06 Konteinerskip 0 % 0 % 4 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 07 Ro Ro last 0 % 2 % 2 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 08 Kjøle-/fryseskip 0 % 8 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 09 Passasjer 2 % 8 % 5 % 6 % 4 % 3 % 1 % 10 Offshore supply skip skip 1 %

• 5 %
• 7 %

0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 11 Andre offshore service 3 %

• 1 %

1 % 2 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 12 Andre aktiviteter 2 % 1 % 3 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 13 Fiskefartøy

• 4 %
• 4 %

1 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

UC-1,7 KV.B, KV.S, NA, Public? Identify the reason for accidents based on ship movements and immediate actions In order to be able to identify trends and take expedient actions

2008 2010 2015 2020 2040 2030 2008 2040 Vessel type Cause of accident

Ship losses and causes

2008 2040 Number of accidents per cause region

Grounding Fire Collision Foundering Ice damage ……. …

2008 2040

Loss type

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

UC-1,11 KV.B, KV.S, NA, Public? To establish an overview of the use of pilots/Farledsbevis – connect to voyage In order to be able to identify trends and take expedient actions

2008 2040 Vessel type With Pilot

Without pilot With pilot

High level risk methodology and focus areas

12

Single ship calculations

• The risk model shall be location-based, i.e. the calculations are

carried out individually for each position, such that the results can be defined as functions of position

• Based on the recorded position of AIS messages a GIS will be

used to draw ship tracks illustrating traffic patterns. Ship tracks are lines drawn between AIS points recorded for each vessel based on the route the vessel has sailed, as shown in the Figure below, and later aggregated within the grid cells for use in the risk calculations. The model aims to operate on a single ship at a time.

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

What have we done so far…

14

• DNV GL ( COW I )
• Approach: Critical situations

Pow ered grounding m odel Drift grounding m odel

• COW I
• Approach: Drift based on metocean

data

Collision m odel

• DNV GL
• Approach: Critical situations (safety

domain/ ellipse)

• DNV GL
• Approach: NavRisk (sailed distance)

Fire/ explosion and foundering m odel

• DNV GL
• Approach: NavRisk + updates

Consequence m odel – Oil

• utflow
• DNV GL
• Approach: NavRisk + updates

Consequence m odel – Loss of lives 3 1 4 5 6 2 6 6 3 3 1 3

Work load rating 1 to 6 Innovation – here we want to focus our efforts!

• --

Contact m odel?

These risk model is influenced by the methodology used in DNV GL’s NavRisk tool, DNV GL’s FARGE project, IALA’s Waterway Risk Assessment (IWRAP tool) and Be-Aware

• methodology. The essentials of these models have been used to develop the new risk

model, but with new innovation and calibration.

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

The overall process of calculating risk

• The calculation process will be fully automatic, with no manual input for execution.

Manual input should only be needed for tool development and updates of parameters

• Accident frequencies are calculated for the following types of accidents; grounding (drift-

and powered grounding), collision (head-on, overtaking and crossing), fire/explosion and foundering

Figure 6-1 High-level illustration of the risk calculation process

Powered grounding model

16

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

General modelling approach for powered grounding

• Simplified calculation formula: Number of critical situations x probability of

grounding, given that ship is in critical situation (course not changed before impact)

• This calculation will primarily be based on the IWRAP method, but the

calculation will be done for individual ships, not merged traffic in lanes (which is the case for IWRAP)

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

Modelling principle

• Requirement:

– Automatic calculations, no manual input of legs, waypoints etc.

• Powered grounding frequency = Sum of N

(Number of critical situations) x Pc (Causation probability)

– Pc models the vessels and the officer of the watch’s ability to perform evasive manoeuvres in the event of potential critical situation.

18

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

Number of critical situations

19

 

Vessel do not turn

• Watch Officer

asleep

• Technical (rudder/

steering gear)

Vessel deviation from route

• Watch Officer

misjudgement (complexity, time etc.)

• Current, waves etc.
• Evasive manoeuvres to

avoid other ship



Powered grounding frequency = Sum of N (Number of critical situations) x Pc (Causation probability)

Type 1 Type 2

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

Number of critical situations

• Type 1
• Downscaled AIS high resolution

data

– 30 s – Due to “noise” in AIS data – Points with low speed to be removed to exclude harbor turnings

• Half year of 2015 data
• General cargo carriers
• Critical turns

– Turns with Rate of Turn (RoT) > 0.1

• (1/radius of curve)

– 30 min vector at turns – Check if the vector ends to land / shallow water – Where ships turn to avoid hitting land

• Process:
• 1. One ship analysed in the first stage
• 2. Scaling up to all vessels in the test

area

• 3. Scaling to Norwegian coast and all

vessels

• Challenge with large amount of data

20

Powered grounding frequency = Sum of N (Number of critical situations) x Pc (Causation probability)

r 1 r = 0

∞

Drift grounding

11 December 2013 21

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

Drift grounding model

Leading indicators and input:

• Distance sailed. Engine breakdown, leading to drift grounding, may be closely

related to time at sea or distance sailed. Calculations; the drift grounding calculations should take into consideration:

• Distance to shore. Grounding frequency at sea must reflect the distance

between the ship’s route and the all potential grounding points.

• Location and capacity of emergency tug services
• Metocean data (wind roses, currents)

Simplified calculation formula: Number of distance sailed (or operation time) x probability of engine malfunction x probability of ship drifts to shore (considering failure to recover ship, failure of tugs etc.) This calculation will primarily be based on the DNV GL FARGE [1] method and the IWRAP method [2], and the calculation will be done for individual ships. 22

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

General modelling approach for drift grounding.

Should the methodology development for grounding fail due to unforeseen reasons (data extensiveness, complexity of modelling, time constraints etc.), the risk model will use one of these two alternatives (back-up methods):

• Alternative 1: Utilise the DNV GL NavRisk methodology for grounding. The above method for

identifying number of critical situations (dangerous courses), in combination with distance to shore, will be used as input to the adjustment factor for the simplified calculation formula: Number of nautical miles sailed x probability of grounding per nautical mile x adjustment factor.

• Alternative 2: Use DNV GL NavRisk methodology for grounding in its current form, with no
• changes. The script for this method is existing, thus it can be implemented with minimum

efforts.

23

Collision model

24

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

25

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

Collision model

• Collision frequency =

Frequency of critical situations * causation factor

– a dependent probability

• f an accident given a

critical situation

• Model utilized AIS

tracks directly

• Vessels are modelled

as ellipses

26

L

• a

B x , y Forward

– Vi tar ansvar for sjøvegen

Critical situations

• A critical situation as two vessels

being within 0.2 nautical miles of each other, and matching one of three criteria

– 0.2 nautical miles can be discussed

• 1) Their course difference being

equal to

– overtaking

• 2) Their course difference being

equal

– a meeting situation.

• 3) a crossing situation

– a. the two ship tracks intersect; or – b. extrapolation of the two ships current position and heading forward in time leads to an intersection

27

1) 2) 3)

Method description summery

28

Method description Acute pollution and loss of life