A fuzzy Bayesian network risk assessment model for analyzing the causes of slow-down processes in two-stroke ship main engines

References

• Antão P, Guedes Soares C. 2008. Causal factors in accidents of high-speed craft and conventional ocean-going vessels. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 93:1292–1304. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2007.07.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aulia R, Tan H, Sriramula S. 2021. Dynamic reliability analysis for residual life assessment of corroded subsea pipelines. Ships Offsh Struct. 16:410–422. doi:10.1080/17445302.2020.1735834.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aydin M, Akyuz E, Turan O, Arslan O. 2021. Validation of risk analysis for ship collision in narrow waters by using fuzzy Bayesian networks approach. Ocean Eng. 231:108973. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.108973.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aydın M, Kamal B. 2022. A fuzzy-Bayesian approach on the bankruptcy of hanjin shipping. JEMS. 10:2–15. doi:10.4274/jems.2021.56689.
   Google Scholar
• Babaleye AO, Kurt RE. 2020. Safety analysis of offshore decommissioning operation through Bayesian network. Ships Offsh Struct. 15:99–109. doi:10.1080/17445302.2019.1589041.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bai X, Ling H, Luo X, Li Y, Yang L, Kang J. 2023. Reliability and availability evaluation on hydraulic system of ship controllable pitch propeller based on evidence theory and dynamic Bayesian network. Ocean Eng. 276:114125. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.114125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayazit O, Kaptan M. 2023. Evaluation of the risk of pollution caused by ship operations through bow-tie-based fuzzy Bayesian network. J Cleaner Prod. 382:135386. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135386.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bi Y, Wang S, Zhang C, Cong H, Gao W, Qu B, Li J. 2023. A Bayesian network-based safety assessment method for solid propellant granule-casting molding process. J Loss Prev Process Ind. 83:105089. doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2023.105089.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celik M, Cebi S. 2009. Analytical HFACS for investigating human errors in shipping accidents. Accid Anal Prev. 41:66–75. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2008.09.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang Y-T, Park H. 2019. The impact of vessel speed reduction on port accidents. Accid Anal Prev. 123:422–432. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2016.03.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen P, Zhang Z, Huang Y, Dai L, Hu H. 2022. Risk assessment of marine accidents with Fuzzy Bayesian Networks and causal analysis. Ocean Coast Manag. 228:106323. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106323.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eleye-Datubo AG, Wall A, Wang J. 2008. Marine and offshore safety assessment by incorporative risk modeling in a fuzzy-Bayesian network of an induced mass assignment paradigm. Risk Anal. 28:95–112. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01004.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erol S, Başar E. 2015. The analysis of ship accident occurred in Turkish search and rescue area by using decision tree. Marit Policy Manage. 42:377–388. doi:10.1080/03088839.2013.870357.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fan H, Enshaei H, Jayasinghe SG. 2022a. Human error probability assessment for LNG bunkering based on fuzzy Bayesian network-CREAM model. J Mar Sci Eng. 10:333. doi:10.3390/jmse10030333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fan H, Enshaei H, Jayasinghe SG. 2022b. Dynamic quantitative risk assessment of LNG bunkering SIMOPs based on Bayesian network. J Ocean Eng Sci. 8. doi:10.1016/j.joes.2022.03.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faulkner D. 2003. Shipping safety: a matter of concern. In: Proceedings-Institute of Marine Engineering Science and Technology Part B Journal of Marine Design and Operations. Vol. 5. London: Imarest Publications; p. 37–56.
   Google Scholar
• Göksu B, Yüksel O, Şakar C. 2023. Risk assessment of the Ship steering gear failures using fuzzy-Bayesian networks. Ocean Eng. 274:114064. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.114064.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haruna A, Jiang P. 2022. Adaptability analysis of design for additive manufacturing by using fuzzy Bayesian network approach. Adv Eng Inf. 52:101613. doi:10.1016/j.aei.2022.101613.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Japan P&I Club. 2023. The Japan ship owners’mutual protection & indemnity association loss prevention and ship inspection department [WWW document]. P&I Loss Prevention Bulletin. URL https://www.piclub.or.jp/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Loss-Prevention-Bulletin-Naiko-Class-Vol.4_Light_1.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Johansen TA, Perez T, Cristofaro A. 2016. Ship collision avoidance and COLREGS compliance using simulation-based control behavior selection With predictive hazard assessment. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst. 17:3407–3422. doi:10.1109/TITS.2016.2551780.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamal B. 2021. The Use of fuzzy-Bayes approach on the causal factors of empty container repositioning. Mar Technol Soc J. 55:20–38. doi:10.4031/MTSJ.55.5.3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamal B, Aydın M. 2022. Application of fuzzy Bayesian approach on bankruptcy causes for container liner industry. Res Transp Bus Manage. 43:100769. doi:10.1016/j.rtbm.2021.100769.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamis AS, Fuad AFA, Anwar AQ, Monir Hossain M. 2022. A systematic scoping review on ship accidents due to off-track manoeuvring. WMU J Marit Aff. 21:453–492. doi:10.1007/s13437-022-00274-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaptan M. 2022. Analysis of accidents during vehicle stowage on RO-RO vessels by using Fuzzy Bayesian networks. Ocean Eng. 260:111997. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.111997.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristiansen S. 2013. Maritime transportation: safety management and risk analysis. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kutay Ş, Kamal B. 2022. Assessment of marine diesel engine crankshaft damages. Ships Offsh Struct. 17:2130–2139. doi:10.1080/17445302.2022.2050522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Z, Wang X, Gong S, Sun N, Tong R. 2022. Risk assessment of unsafe behavior in university laboratories using the HFACS-UL and a fuzzy Bayesian network. J Saf Res. 82:13–27. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2022.04.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lo H-W, Liou JJH. 2018. A novel multiple-criteria decision-making-based FMEA model for risk assessment. Appl Soft Comput. 73:684–696. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2018.09.020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mirzaei Aliabadi M, Pourhasan A, Mohammadfam I. 2020. Risk modelling of a hydrogen gasholder using Fuzzy Bayesian Network (FBN). Int J Hydrogen Energy. 45:1177–1186. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.10.198.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. n.d. Mitsui-MAN B&W, Instruction Book, Volume 5, Manoeuvring system, engine remote control system section, shut down-slow down display.
   Google Scholar
• Mitsui-MAN B&W. n.d. Mitsui-MAN B&W Diesel Engine 6S60MC Type, Instruction Manual, Engine Remote Control System (BMS-2000 II).
   Google Scholar
• Onisawa T. 1988. An approach to human reliability in man-machine systems using error possibility. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 27:87–103. doi:10.1016/0165-0114(88)90140-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qazi A, Dickson A, Quigley J, Gaudenzi B. 2018. Supply chain risk network management: a Bayesian belief network and expected utility based approach for managing supply chain risks. Int J Prod Econ. 196:24–42. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.11.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qiao W, Liu Y, Ma X, Liu Y. 2020. Human factors analysis for maritime accidents based on a dynamic fuzzy Bayesian network. Risk Anal. 40:957–980. doi:10.1111/risa.13444.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Senol YE, Yasli F. 2021. A risk analysis study for chemical cargo tank cleaning process using Fuzzy Bayesian Network. Ocean Eng. 235:109360. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109360.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szlapczynski R, Krata P, Szlapczynska J. 2018. Ship domain applied to determining distances for collision avoidance manoeuvres in give-way situations. Ocean Eng. 165:43–54. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.07.041.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turna İ. 2023. A Fuzzy Bayesian approach for ‘Appraisal’ of ship voyage plans. Ships Offsh Struct. 18:859–866. doi:10.1080/17445302.2022.2077279.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ventikos NP, Papanikolaou AD, Louzis K, Koimtzoglou A. 2018. Statistical analysis and critical review of navigational accidents in adverse weather conditions. Ocean Eng. 163:502–517. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.06.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wan C, Yan X, Zhang D, Qu Z, Yang Z. 2019. An advanced fuzzy Bayesian-based FMEA approach for assessing maritime supply chain risks. Transp Res Part E Logist Transp Rev. 125:222–240. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2019.03.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang F, Zhao L, Bai Y. 2023. Survey on reliability analysis of dynamic positioning systems. Ships Offsh Struct. 1–11. doi:10.1080/17445302.2023.2225959.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang G, Spencer J, Chen Y. 2002. Assessment of a ship’s performance in accidents. Mar Struct. 15:313–333. doi:10.1016/S0951-8339(02)00017-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West Pandi. n.d. P&I Guidelines practical notes for ships’ Personnel [WWW Document]. URL https://www.westpandi.com/getattachment/6c4e10e0-dae9-4a90-83d2-ef2678aeb020/woe5161_p-i-guidelines_uk_web_aw.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Xue J, Papadimitriou E, Reniers G, Wu C, Jiang D, van Gelder PHAJM. 2021. A comprehensive statistical investigation framework for characteristics and causes analysis of ship accidents: A case study in the fluctuating backwater area of Three Gorges Reservoir region. Ocean Eng. 229:108981. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.108981.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yalcin E, Pehlivan EF, Cetin BA, Aymelek M. 2022. Optimising ship manoeuvring time during port approach using a decision support system: a case study in Turkey. Ships Offsh Struct. 1713–1725. doi:10.1080/17445302.2022.2140522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Youssef SAM, Paik JK. 2018. Hazard identification and scenario selection of ship grounding accidents. Ocean Eng. 153:242–255. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.01.110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yucesan M, Gul M, Celik E. 2021. A holistic FMEA approach by fuzzy-based Bayesian network and best–worst method. Complex Intell Syst. 7:1547–1564. doi:10.1007/s40747-021-00279-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang D, Yan XP, Yang ZL, Wall A, Wang J. 2013. Incorporation of formal safety assessment and Bayesian network in navigational risk estimation of the Yangtze River. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 118:93–105. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2013.04.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang X, Zhang Q, Yang J, Cong Z, Luo J, Chen H. 2019. Safety risk analysis of unmanned ships in inland rivers based on a fuzzy Bayesian network. J Adv Transp. 2019:1–15. doi:10.1155/2019/4057195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao L, Fu X. 2021. A novel index for real-time ship collision risk assessment based on velocity obstacle considering dimension data from AIS. Ocean Eng. 240:109913. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109913.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao X, He Y, Huang L, Mou J, Zhang K, Liu X. 2022. Intelligent collision avoidance method for ships based on COLRGEs and improved velocity obstacle algorithm. Appl Sci. 12:8926. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12188926.
   Google Scholar