Review

Ocean Observation Technologies: A Review

  • Mingwei Lin ,
  • Canjun Yang
展开
  • 1. State Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic Systems, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China;
    2. Pilot National Laboratory of Marine Science and Technology (Qingdao), Qingdao 266000, China;
    3. Ningbo Research Institute, Zhejiang University, Ningbo 315100, China

收稿日期: 2019-11-12

  修回日期: 2020-02-28

  网络出版日期: 2020-06-17

基金资助

Supported in part by the Marine S&T Fund of Shandong Province (Grant No. 2018SDKJ0211), in part by the Fund of Platform for Technical Innovation Ningbo Research Institute of Zhejiang University (Grant No. NRI-ZJU-2019001), and in part by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. 2019XZZX003-07)

Ocean Observation Technologies: A Review

  • Mingwei Lin ,
  • Canjun Yang
Expand
  • 1. State Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic Systems, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China;
    2. Pilot National Laboratory of Marine Science and Technology (Qingdao), Qingdao 266000, China;
    3. Ningbo Research Institute, Zhejiang University, Ningbo 315100, China

Received date: 2019-11-12

  Revised date: 2020-02-28

  Online published: 2020-06-17

Supported by

Supported in part by the Marine S&T Fund of Shandong Province (Grant No. 2018SDKJ0211), in part by the Fund of Platform for Technical Innovation Ningbo Research Institute of Zhejiang University (Grant No. NRI-ZJU-2019001), and in part by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. 2019XZZX003-07)

摘要

Covering about three quarters of the surface area of the earth, the ocean is a critical source of sustenance, medicine, and commerce. However, such vast expanse in both surface area and depth, presents myriad observing challenges for researchers, such as corrosion, attenuation of electromagnetic waves, and high pressure. Ocean observation technologies are progressing from the conventional single node, static and short-term modalities to multiple nodes, dynamic and long-term modalities, to increase the density of both temporal and spatial samplings. Although people's knowledge of the oceans has been still quite limited, the contributions of many nations cooperating to develop the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) have remarkably promoted the development of ocean observing technologies. This paper reviews the typical observing technologies deployed from the sea surface to the seafloor, and discusses the future trend of the ocean observation systems with the docking technology and sustained ocean energy.

本文引用格式

Mingwei Lin , Canjun Yang . Ocean Observation Technologies: A Review[J]. Chinese Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 2020 , 33(2) : 32 -32 . DOI: 10.1186/s10033-020-00449-z

Abstract

Covering about three quarters of the surface area of the earth, the ocean is a critical source of sustenance, medicine, and commerce. However, such vast expanse in both surface area and depth, presents myriad observing challenges for researchers, such as corrosion, attenuation of electromagnetic waves, and high pressure. Ocean observation technologies are progressing from the conventional single node, static and short-term modalities to multiple nodes, dynamic and long-term modalities, to increase the density of both temporal and spatial samplings. Although people's knowledge of the oceans has been still quite limited, the contributions of many nations cooperating to develop the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) have remarkably promoted the development of ocean observing technologies. This paper reviews the typical observing technologies deployed from the sea surface to the seafloor, and discusses the future trend of the ocean observation systems with the docking technology and sustained ocean energy.

参考文献

[1] Argo Project Office: Why do we need Argo? 2020[2020-03-29]. http://argo.ucsd.edu/.
[2] K Suyehiro, H Mikada, K Asakawa. Japanese seafloor observing systems: Present and future. Marine Technology Society Journal, 2003, 37(3): 102-114.
[3] Michael J Mcphaden. The tropical atmosphere ocean array is completed. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 1995, 76(5): 739-741.
[4] J D Woods. The world ocean circulation experiment. Nature, 1985, 6011(314): 501-511.
[5] World Ocean Circulation Experiment (WOCE). 2020[2020-03-29]. https://www.jodc.go.jp/goin/adcp.html.
[6] Thomas C Malone. The coastal module of the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS): an assessment of current capabilities to detect change. Marine Policy, 2003, 27(4): 295-302.
[7] GEO: GROUP EARTH OBSERVATIONS. 2020[2020-03-29]. http://www.earthobservations.org/geoss.php.
[8] Earth Observing Laboratory (EOL): Tropical Ocean - Global Atmosphere (TOGA) and Coupled Ocean Atmosphere Response Experiment (COARE). 1992[2020-03-29]. https://www.eol.ucar.edu/field_projects/toga-coare.
[9] Arthur B Baggeroer, Bruce M Howe, Peter N Mikhalevsky, et al. Ocean observatories: An engineering challenge. The Bridge, 2018: 18-34.
[10] R Cole, J Kinder, Chun Lin Ning, et al. "Bai-Long": A TAO-hybrid on RAMA. Oceans, 2011: 1-10.
[11] S Aracri, M Borghini, D Canesso, et al. Trials of an autonomous profiling buoy system. Journal of Operational Oceanography, 2016, 9(Sup1): 176-184.
[12] Robert A Weller. Observing surface meteorology and air-sea fluxes. Observing the Oceans in Real Time, 2018: 17-35.
[13] Sébastien P Bigorre, Robert A Weller, James B Edson, et al. A surface mooring for air-sea interaction research in the gulf stream Part Ⅱ: Analysis of the observations and their accuracies. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 2013, 30(3): 450-469.
[14] Claudine Hauri, Seth Danielson, Andrew M P Mcdonnell, et al. From sea ice to seals: A moored marine ecosystem observatory in the Arctic. Ocean Science Discussions, 2018: 1-16.
[15] Andrew Hamilton. Buoy technology. Ocean Engineering, 2016: 937-962.
[16] David Elwood, Solomon C Yim, Joe Prudell, et al. Design, construction, and ocean testing of a taut-moored dual-body wave energy converter with a linear generator power take-off. Renewable Energy, 2010, 35(2): 348-354.
[17] Akira Nagano, Iwao Ueki, Takuya Hasegawa, et al. Ocean-atmosphere observations in Philippine sea by moored buoy. Oceans, 2018: 1-6.
[18] D J Maxwell, T Mettlach, B Taft, et al. The 2010 National Data Buoy Center (NDBC) mooring workshop. IEEE, 2010.
[19] R Venkatesan, J K Lix, A Phanindra Reddy, et al. Two decades of operating the Indian moored buoy network: significance and impact. Journal of Operational Oceanography, 2016, 9(1): 45-54.
[20] Russ E Davis. Drifter observations of coastal surface currents during CODE: The method and descriptive view. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 1985, 90(3): 4741-4755.
[21] Semyon A Grodsky, Rick Lumpkin, James A Carton. Spurious trends in global surface drifter currents. Geophysical Research Letters, 2011, 38(10): 1-6.
[22] Rick Lumpkin, Luca Centurioni, Renellys C Perez. Fulfilling observing system implementation requirements with the global drifter array. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 2016, 33(4): 685-695.
[23] Pearn P Niiler, Andrew S Sybrandy, Kenong Bi, et al. Measurements of the water-following capability of holey-sock and TRISTAR drifters. Deep Sea Research Part Ⅰ: Oceanographic Research Papers, 1995, 42(11): 1951-1964.
[24] Rick Lumpkin, Mayra Pazos. Measuring surface currents with Surface Velocity Program drifters: the instrument, its data, and some recent results. Lagrangian Analysis and Prediction of Coastal and Ocean Dynamics, 2005.
[25] Scott D Woodruff, Steven J Worley, Sandra J Lubker, et al. ICOADS Release 2.5: extensions and enhancements to the surface marine meteorological archive. International Journal of Climatology, 2011, 31(7): 951-967.
[26] Erik van Sebille, Stephanie Waterman, Alice Barthel, et al. Pairwise surface drifter separation in the western Pacific sector of the Southern Ocean. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 2015, 120(10): 6769-6781.
[27] Yu-Chia Chang, Ruo-Shan Tseng, Peter C Chu, et al. Observed strong currents under global tropical cyclones. Journal of Marine Systems, 2016, 159: 33-40.
[28] Rick Lumpkin, Semyon A Grodsky, Luca Centurioni, et al. Removing spurious low-frequency variability in drifter velocities. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 2013, 30(2): 353-360.
[29] Guillaume Novelli, Cédric M Guigand, Charles Cousin, et al. A biodegradable surface drifter for ocean sampling on a massive scale. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 2017, 34(11): 2509-2532.
[30] Arthur P Cracknell, Costas A Varotsos. Editorial and cover: Fifty years after the first artificial satellite: from Sputnik 1 to ENVISAT. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 2007, 28(10): 2071-2072.
[31] E Paul Mcclain. Multiple atmospheric-window techniques for satellite-derived sea surface temperatures. Oceanography from Space, 1981: 73-85.
[32] T Misra, R Sharma, R Kumar, et al. Ocean remote sensing: Concept to realization for physical oceanographic studies. Observing the Oceans in Real Time, 2018: 165-202.
[33] G Picardi, R Seu, S G Sorge, et al. Bistatic model of ocean scattering. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 1998, 46(10): 1531-1541.
[34] David T Sandwell, Walter H F Smith. Retracking ERS-1 altimeter waveforms for optimal gravity field recovery. Geophysical Journal International, 2005, 163(1): 79-89.
[35] Lee-Lueng Fu, Eds Anny Cazenave. Satellite altimetry and earth sciences: a handbook of techniques and applications. Elsevier, 2000.
[36] Federico Raspini, Andrea Ciampalini, Sara Del Conte, et al. Exploitation of amplitude and phase of satellite SAR images for landslide mapping: The case of Montescaglioso (South Italy). Remote Sensing, 2015, 7(11): 14576-14596.
[37] Thierry Toutin, Laurence Gray. State-of-the-art of elevation extraction from satellite SAR data. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 2000, 55(1): 13-33.
[38] Volker Bertram. Unmanned surface vehicles - A survey. Skibsteknisk Selskab, Copenhagen, Denmark. 2008: 1-14.
[39] S J Corfield, J M Young. Unmanned surface vehicles - game changing technology for naval operations. Advances in Unmanned Marine Vehicles, 2006.
[40] Marco Bibuli, Massimo Caccia, Lionel Lapierre, et al. Guidance of unmanned surface vehicles: Experiments in vehicle following. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 2012, 19(3): 92-102.
[41] Ru-Jian Yan, Shuo Pang, Han-Bing Sun, et al. Development and missions of unmanned surface vehicle. Journal of Marine Science and Application, 2010, 9(4): 451-457.
[42] Jiucai Jin, Jie Zhang, Feng Shao, et al. A novel ocean bathymetry technology based on an unmanned surface vehicle. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 2018, 37(9): 99-106.
[43] Yingjie Deng, Xianku Zhang, Guoqing Zhang, et al. Parallel guidance and event-triggered robust fuzzy control for path following of autonomous wing-sailed catamaran. Ocean Engineering, 2019, 190: 106442.
[44] Seok-In Sohn, Jung-Hwan Oh, Yeon-Seung Lee, et al. Design of a fuel-cell-powered catamaran-type unmanned surface vehicle. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2015, 40(2): 388-396.
[45] Pranay Agrawal, John M Dolan. COLREGS-compliant target following for an Unmanned Surface Vehicle in dynamic environments. IEEE, 2015.
[46] Paul Mahacek, Christopher A Kitts, Ignacio Mas. Dynamic guarding of marine assets through cluster control of automated surface vessel fleets. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 2012, 17(1): 65-75.
[47] Amit Motwani. A survey of uninhabited surface vehicles. Marine and Industrial Dynamic Analysis, School of Marine Science and Engineering, Plymouth University, 2012.
[48] Justin E Manley. Unmanned surface vehicles, 15 years of development. Oceans, 2008.
[49] S Phillips, D Hook, H Young. Remote deployment of commercial and military sensors at sea. Proceedings of UDT Europe 2008, Nexus Media, Glasgow, Scotland, June 2008.
[50] J Manley, S Willcox. The wave glider: A new concept for deploying ocean instrumentation. IEEE Instrumentation & Measurement Magazine, 2010, 13(6): 8-13.
[51] Tom Daniel, Justin Manley, Neil Trenaman. The wave glider: enabling a new approach to persistent ocean observation and research. Ocean Dynamics, 2011, 61(10): 1509-1520.
[52] Yong Ma, Yujiao Zhao, Jiantao Diao, et al. Design of sail-assisted unmanned surface vehicle intelligent control system. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2016: 1-13.
[53] X Q Zhou, L L Ling, J M Ma, et al. The design and application of an unmanned surface vehicle powered by solar and wind energy. 2015 6th International Conference on Power Electronics Systems and Applications (PESA), 2015: 1-10.
[54] Dean H Roemmich, Russ Davis, Stephen Riser, et al. The Argo Project: Global ocean observations for understanding and prediction of climate variability. Oceanography, 2000, 2(7).
[55] Stephen C Riser, Howard J Freeland, Dean Roemmich, et al. Fifteen years of ocean observations with the global Argo array. Nature Climate Change, 2016, 6(2): 145-153.
[56] J C Swallow. Some further deep current measurements using neutrally-buoyant floats. Deep Sea Research, 1957, 4(1953): 93-104.
[57] A Sterl, B Klein, V Thierry, et al. Argo - A decade of progress. 2009.
[58] Lijing Cheng, Jiang Zhu, Rebecca Cowley, et al. Time, probe type, and temperature variable bias corrections to historical expendable bathythermograph observations. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 2014, 31(8): 1793-1825.
[59] Sylvia T Cole, Cimarron Wortham, Eric Kunze, et al. Eddy stirring and horizontal diffusivity from Argo float observations: Geographic and depth variability. Geophysical Research Letters, 2015, 42(10): 3989-3997.
[60] Meghan F Cronin. Monitoring ocean-atmosphere interactions in western boundary current extensions. 2010.
[61] Dongliang Yuan, Zhichun Zhang, Peter C Chu, et al. Geostrophic circulation in the tropical north pacific ocean based on Argo profiles. Journal of Physical Oceanography, 2014, 44(2): 558-575.
[62] Katsuro Katsumata, Hiroshi Yoshinari. Uncertainties in global mapping of Argo drift data at the parking level. Journal of Oceanography, 2010, 66(4): 553-569.
[63] John M Toole, Richard A Krishfield, Mary-Louise Timmermans, et al. The Ice-Tethered Profiler: Argo of the Arctic. Oceanography, 2011, 24(3): 126-135.
[64] Sarah G Purkey, Gregory C Johnson. Antarctic bottom water warming and freshening: Contributions to sea level rise, ocean freshwater budgets, and global heat gain. Journal of Climate, 2013, 26(16): 6105-6122.
[65] Gregory C Johnson, Sarah G Purkey, John L Bullister. Warming and freshening in the Abyssal Southeastern Indian Ocean. Journal of Climate, 2008, 21(20): 5351-5363.
[66] Serge Le Reste, Vincent Dutreuil, Xavier André, et al. "Deep-Arvor": A new profiling float to extend the Argo observations down to 4000-m depth. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 2016, 33(5): 1039-1055.
[67] Emil Vassilev Stanev, Sebastian Grayek, Hervé Claustre, et al. Water intrusions and particle signatures in the Black Sea: a Biogeochemical-Argo float investigation. Ocean Dynamics, 2017, 67(9): 1119-1136.
[68] Martina Troesch, Steve Chien, Yi Chao, et al. Autonomous control of marine floats in the presence of dynamic, uncertain ocean currents. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 2018, 108: 100-114.
[69] Ryan N Smith, Van T Huynh. Controlling buoyancy-driven profiling floats for applications in ocean observation. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2014, 39(3): 571-586.
[70] Henry M Stommel. The Slocum mission. Oceanography, 1989, 1(2): 22-25.
[71] J Sherman, R E Davis, W B Owens, et al. The autonomous underwater glider "Spray". IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2001, 26(4): 437-446.
[72] C C Eriksen, T J Osse, R D Light, et al. Seaglider: a long-range autonomous underwater vehicle for oceanographic research. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2001, 26(4): 424-436.
[73] D C Webb, P J Simonetti, C P Jones. SLOCUM: an underwater glider propelled by environmental energy. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2001, 26(4): 447-452.
[74] D L Rudnick, R E Davis, C C Eriksen, et al. Underwater gliders for ocean research. Marine Technology Society Journal, 2004, 38(2): 73-84.
[75] Amandine Schaeffer, Moninya Roughan, Emlyn M Jones, et al. Physical and biogeochemical spatial scales of variability in the East Australian Current separation from shelf glider measurements. Biogeosciences, 2016, 13(6): 1967-1975.
[76] David K Mellinger, Sharon L Nieukirk, Sara L Heimlich, et al. Passive acoustic monitoring in the Northern Gulf of Mexico using ocean gliders. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2017, 142(4): 2533.
[77] Douglas R Zemeckis, Micah J Dean, Annamaria I Deangelis, et al. Identifying the distribution of Atlantic cod spawning using multiple fixed and glider-mounted acoustic technologies. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 2019.
[78] Russ E Davis, William S Kessler, Jeffrey T Sherman. Gliders measure western boundary current transport from the South Pacific to the Equator. Journal of Physical Oceanography, 2012, 42(11): 2001-2013.
[79] J Karstensen, T Liblik, J Fischer, et al. Summer upwelling at the Boknis Eck time series station (1982 to 2012)-a combined glider and wind data analysis. Biogeosciences, 2014, 11(13): 3603-3617.
[80] Daniel L Rudnick, T M Shaun Johnston, Jeffrey T Sherman. High‐frequency internal waves near the Luzon Strait observed by underwater gliders. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 2013, 118(2): 774-784.
[81] Mar M Flexas, Martina I Troesch, Steve Chien, et al. Autonomous sampling of ocean submesoscale fronts with ocean gliders and numerical model forecasting. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 2018, 35(3): 503-521.
[82] J P Martin, C M Lee, C C Eriksen, et al. Glider observations of kinematics in a Gulf of Alaska eddy. Journal of Geophysical Research, 2009, 114(C12): 1-19.
[83] Sandy J Thomalla, Marie-Fanny Racault, Sebastiaan Swart, et al. High-resolution view of the spring bloom initiation and net community production in the Subantarctic Southern Ocean using glider data. ICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil, 2015, 72(6): 1999-2020.
[84] Camille M L S Pagniello, Megan A Cimino, Eric Terrill. Mapping fish chorus distributions in southern California using an autonomous wave glider. Frontiers in Marine Science, 2019, 6.
[85] Jesse R Powell, Mark D Ohman. Changes in zooplankton habitat, behavior, and acoustic scattering characteristics across glider-resolved fronts in the Southern California Current System. Progress in Oceanography, 2015, 134: 77-92.
[86] Scott Glenn, Clayton Jones, Michael Twardowski, et al. Glider observations of sediment resuspension in a Middle Atlantic Bight Fall Transition Storm. Limnology and Oceanography, 2008, 53(5): 2180-2196.
[87] Evan B Clark, Andrew Branch, Steve Chien, et al. Station-keeping underwater gliders using a predictive ocean circulation model and applications to SWOT calibration and validation. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2018: 1-14.
[88] Puzhe Zhou, Canjun Yang, Shijun Wu, et al. Designated area persistent monitoring strategies for hybrid underwater profilers. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2019: 1-15.
[89] Russ E Davis, Naomi E Leonard, David M Fratantoni. Routing strategies for underwater gliders. Deep Sea Research Part Ⅱ: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 2009, 56(3-5): 173-187.
[90] David Meyer. Glider technology for ocean observations: A review. Ocean Science Discussions, 2016: 1-26.
[91] Qingchao Xia, Yanhu Chen, Canjun Yang, et al. A new model of phase change process for thermal energy storage. International Journal of Energy Research, 2018, 42(12): 3877-3887.
[92] B M Howe, F K Duennebier, R Lukas. The ALOHA cabled observatory. SEAFLOOR OBSERVATORIES: A New Vision of the Earth from the Abyss, Favali P, Beranzoli L, De Santis A, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2015: 439-463.
[93] Tianlei Wang, Dejun Li, Canjun Yang, et al. Non-contact wet mate connectors for subsea observation networks. Oceans 2016 MTS/IEEE Monterey, 2016.
[94] N C Forrester, Roger Stokey, C von Alt, et al. The LEO-15 long-term ecosystem observatory: design and installation. Oceans, 1997.
[95] B M Howe, H Kirkham, V Vorperian. Power system considerations for undersea observatories. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2002, 27(2): 267-274.
[96] Kenichi Asakawa, Junichi Kojima, Jun Muramatsu, et al. Current-to-current converter for scientific underwater cable networks. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2007, 32(3): 584-592.
[97] Ting Chan, Chen-Ching Liu, Bruce M Howe, et al. Fault location for the NEPTUNE power system. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2007, 22(2): 522-531.
[98] K Kawaguchi, Y Kaneda, E Araki. The DONET: A real-time seafloor research infrastructure for the precise earthquake and tsunami monitoring: OCEANS MTS/IEEE. Kobe: 20081-4.
[99] T Kanazawa. Japan Trench earthquake and tsunami monitoring network of cable-linked 150 ocean bottom observatories and its impact to earth disaster science. IEEE International Underwater Technology Symposium, 2013: 1-5.
[100] K Kawaguchi, H Momma, R Iwase. VENUS PROJECT-submarine cable recovery system. Oceans, 1998: 448-452.
[101] K Asakawa, J Muramatsu, J Kojima, et al. Feasibility study on power feeding system for scientific cable network ARENA. The 3rd International Workshop on Scientific Use of Submarine Cables and Related Technologies, IEEE, 2003: 307-312.
[102] Chris R Barnes, Mairi Mr Best, Adam Zielinski. The NEPTUNE Canada regional cabled ocean observatory. Technology (Crayford, England), 2008, 3(50).
[103] R Dewey, V Tunnicliffe. VENUS: future science on a coastal mid-depth observatory. The 3rd International Workshop on Scientific Use of Submarine Cables and Related Technologies, IEEE, 2003: 232-233.
[104] R G Henthorn, B W Hobson, P R Mcgill, et al. MARS benthic rover: In-situ rapid proto-testing on the Monterey Accelerated Research System. Oceans, 2010: 1-7.
[105] B M Howe, R Lukas, F Duennebier, et al. ALOHA cabled observatory installation. IEEE, 2011.
[106] Peter Yinger, Philip Tennant, John Reardon, et al. Commissioning of a system that terminates on the seafloor. Oceans, 2013: 1-6.
[107] R Person, L Beranzoli, C Berndt, et al. ESONET: An European sea observatory initiative. Oceans, 2008: 1-6.
[108] F Lu, H Zhou, X Peng, et al. Technical preparation and prototype development for long-term cabled seafloor observatories in Chinese marginal seas. SEAFLOOR OBSERVATORIES: A New Vision of the Earth from the Abyss, Favali P, Beranzoli L, De Santis A. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2015: 503-529.
[109] F K Duennebier, D W Harris, J Jolly, et al. HUGO: the Hawaii undersea geo-observatory. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2002, 27(2): 218-227.
[110] Rhett Butler, Alan D Chave, Frederick K Duennebier, et al. H2O-Hawaii‐2 observatory pioneers opportunities for remote instrumentation in ocean studies. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 2000, 15(81): 157-163.
[111] T C Austin, J B Edson, W R Mcgillis, et al. A network-based telemetry architecture developed for the Martha's Vineyard Coastal Observatory. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2002, 27(2): 228-234.
[112] R Person, P Favali, H A Ruhl, et al. From ESONET multidisciplinary scientific community to EMSO novel European research infrastructure for ocean observation. SEAFLOOR OBSERVATORIES: A New Vision of the Earth from the Abyss, Favali P, Beranzoli L, De Santis A, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2015: 531-563.
[113] SMART Cables for Observing the Global Ocean: Science and Implementation. Frontiers in Marine Science, 2019, 6(424): 1-27.
[114] Rhett Butler. The scientific and societal case for the integration of environmental sensors into new submarine telecommunication cables. Joint Task Force on Green Cables ITU/WMO/UNESCO/IOC publication, 2014.
[115] C Kunz, C Murphy, R Camilli, et al. Deep sea underwater robotic exploration in the ice-covered Arctic ocean with AUVs. IEEE, 2008.
[116] A R Diercks, V L Asper, M Woolsey, et al. Site reconnaissance surveys for oil spill research using deep-sea AUVs. MTS, 2013.
[117] Yanwu Zhang, J G Bellingham, M A Godin, et al. Using an autonomous underwater vehicle to track the thermocline based on peak-gradient detection. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2012, 37(3): 544-553.
[118] A D Bowen, D R Yoerger, C Taylor, et al. The Nereus hybrid underwater robotic vehicle for global ocean science operations to 11, 000m depth. Oceans, 2008: 1-10.
[119] J J Leonard, A Bahr. Autonomous underwater vehicle navigation. Springer Handbook of Ocean Engineering, Springer, 2016: 341-358.
[120] Mingwei Lin, Canjun Yang, Dejun Li. Hybrid strategy based model parameter estimation of irregular-shaped underwater vehicles for predicting velocity. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 2020, 127: 103480.
[121] Mingwei Lin, Canjun Yang, Dejun Li. An improved transformed unscented FastSLAM with adaptive genetic resampling. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 2019, 66(5): 3583-3594.
[122] Jie Li, Michael Kaess, Ryan M Eustice, et al. Pose-graph SLAM using forward-looking sonar. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 2018, 3(3): 2330-2337.
[123] Mingwei Lin, Canjun Yang, Dejun Li, et al. Intelligent filter-based SLAM for mobile robots with improved localization performance. IEEE Access, 2019, 7: 113284-113297.
[124] Jimin Hwang, Neil Bose, Shuangshuang Fan. AUV adaptive sampling methods: A review. Applied Sciences, 2019, 9(15): 3145-3174.
[125] Naomi Ehrich Leonard. Cooperative vehicle environmental monitoring. Springer Handbook of Ocean Engineering, Springer, Cham, 2016: 441-458.
[126] Alan J Jamieson, Toyonobu Fujii, Daniel J Mayor, et al. Hadal trenches: the ecology of the deepest places on Earth. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2010, 25(3): 190-197.
[127] Alan J Jamieson, Toyonobu Fujii, Martin Solan, et al. HADEEP: Free-falling landers to the deepest places on earth. Marine Technology Society Journal, 2009, 43(5): 151-160.
[128] Kevin Hardy, Tim Bulman, James Cameron, et al. Hadal landers: the DEEPSEA CHALLENGE ocean trench free vehicles. Oceans MTS/IEEE - San Diego, 2013: 1-10.
[129] Jun Chen, Qifeng Zhang, Aiqun Zhang, et al. 7000m lander design for hadal research. Oceans - MTS/IEEE Washington, 2014: 1-4.
[130] Chen Han, Qiu Xuelin, He Enyuan, et al. Accurate measurement and inversion for the seafloor positions of Hadal landers. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2019, 5(62): 1744-1754.
[131] Jun Chen, Qifeng Zhang, Yunxiu Zhang, et al. Scientific investigation application of hadal landers in the Mariana Trench. Oceans MTS/IEEE Anchorage, 2017: 1-8.
[132] Shi-Jun Wu, Shuo Wang, Can-Jun Yang. Collection of gas-tight water samples from the bottom of the challenger deep. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 2018, 35(4): 837-844.
[133] D E Frye, J Kemp, W Paul, et al. Mooring developments for autonomous ocean-sampling networks. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2001, 26(4): 477-486..
[134] Dejun Li, Yanhu Chen, Jianguang Shi, et al. Autonomous underwater vehicle docking system for cabled ocean observatory network. Ocean Engineering, 2015, 109: 127-134.
[135] Canjun Yang, Mingwei Lin, Dejun Li. Improving steady and starting characteristics of wireless charging for an AUV docking system. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2018: 1-12.
[136] Mingwei Lin, Dejun Li, Canjun Yang. Design of an ICPT system for battery charging applied to underwater docking systems. Ocean Engineering, 2017, 145: 373-381.
[137] Robert S Mcewen, Brett W Hobson, Lance Mcbride et al. Docking control system for a 54-cm-diameter (21-in) AUV. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2008, 33(4): 550-562.
[138] Ri Lin, Dejun Li, Tao Zhang, et al. A non-contact docking system for charging and recovering autonomous underwater vehicle. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 2019, 24(3): 902-916.
[139] Canjun Yang, Tianlei Wang, Yanhu Chen. Design and analysis of an omnidirectional and positioning tolerant AUV charging platform. IET Power Electronics, 2019, 12(8): 2108-2117.
[140] Edwin Olson, John J Leonard, Seth Teller. Robust range-only beacon localization, IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2006, 31(4): 949-958.
文章导航

/