## 3 Route Determination for Ship Passage Using Capability Plots
### Other Examples of Determined Routes
#### 3.4.1 Navigation Scenario #1  
In the navigation scenario shown in Figure 14, the route determined by the algorithm to the first anchorage point is presented. The route has been generated based on environmental condition data for the area covered by the anchor plan:  
* wind speed: 25 m/s.
* true wind direction: 350\({}^{\circ}\).
* sea current speed: 1 m/s.
* true sea current direction: 20\({}^{\circ}\).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline
**Waypoints’ Edge** & **d [m]** & **Course** [\({}^{\circ}\)] & **k [-] & **_d-k_** \\ \hline Point A -\(>0\) & 1900 & 60 & 0.211 & 400.9 \\
0 -\(>12\) & 452 & 45 & 0.193 & 87.2 \\
12 -\(>23\) & 320 & 0 & 0.053 & 16.9 \\
23 -\(>34\) & 320 & 0 & 0.053 & 16.9 \\
34 -\(>45\) & 320 & 0 & 0.053 & 16.9 \\
45 -\(>56\) & 320 & 0 & 0.053 & 16.9 \\
56 -\(>68\) & 452 & 45 & 0.193 & 87.2 \\
68 -\(>80\) & 452 & 45 & 0.193 & 87.2 \\
80 -\(>91\) (Point B) & 320 & 0 & 0.053 & 16.9 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline
**Sum** & **747** \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: The value of the route cost function.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline
**Phase** & **S** & **V** & **t** & **Course** & **True** & **Conv. Force** & **Sum** & **Fuel** & **Energy** \\
**[NM]** & **[knots]** & **[h]** & **[\({}^{\circ}\)]** & **[PERSON]** & **[PERSON]** [\({}^{\circ}\)]** & **[PERSON]** [X-Axis]** & **[PERSON]** [kN]** & **[PERSON]** [L]** & **[PERSON]** [kWh]** \\ \hline Point A -\(>0\) & 1.02 & 4 & 0.263 & 60 & 20 & [66 kN; 17 kN] & 76.83 & 225 & 2182.5 \\
0 -\(>12\) & 0.24 & 4 & 0.062 & 45 & 20 & [43 kN; 15 kN] & 53.73 & 37.22 & 361.034 \\
12 -\(>23\) & 0.17 & 4 & 0.04 & 0 & 20 & [33 kN; 16 kN] & 44.56 & 19.91 & 193.127 \\
23 -\(>34\) & 0.17 & 4 & 0.04 & 0 & 20 & [33 kN; 16 kN] & 44.56 & 19.91 & 193.127 \\
34 -\(>45\) & 0.17 & 4 & 0.04 & 0 & 20 & [33 kN; 16 kN] & 44.56 & 19.91 & 193.127 \\
45 -\(>56\) & 0.17 & 4 & 0.04 & 0 & 20 & [33 kN; 16 kN] & 44.56 & 19.91 & 193.127 \\
56 -\(>68\) & 0.24 & 4 & 0.062 & 45 & 20 & [43 kN; 15 kN] & 53.73 & 37.22 & 361.034 \\
68 -\(>91\) & 0.17 & 4 & 0.04 & 0 & 20 & [33 kN; 16 kN] & 44.56 & 19.91 & 193.127 \\ (Point B) & & & & & & & & & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 5: Energy consumption for the route determined by the algorithm.  
To determine the route cost function, new transition weights between waypoints must be calculated (the wind speed has changed from 10 m/s to 25 m/s). The new values are shown in Figure 15.  
The route cost function is shown in Table 6. To show only the cost of the route determined by the algorithm, the table does not include the cost of reaching the starting point.  
The cost of the route function for the first scenario, when the ship travels straight to the destination, is about 1261, which is approximately 8.6% more than for the route determined by the algorithm. In order to compare the energy consumption when the ship travels directly to the destination with that when it follows the route determined by the algorithm, an energy consumption analysis was carried out, the results of which are presented in Tables 7 and 8. To illustrate only the difference between the algorithmic route and the direct route to the endpoint, the first waypoint on the grid was set as the starting point (A) and the green waypoint on the grid was set as the endpoint (B).  
Figure 14: The ship passage route—true wind direction 350\({}^{\circ}\).  
Figure 15: The transition weights for wind speed 25 m/s.  
During the route directly to the destination, energy consumption was 5773.44 [kWh].  
In Scenario 2, the energy consumption for the route determined by the algorithm was 5426.18 kWh, resulting in a 6% reduction in energy consumption compared to the direct route.