Journal of Transportation Security

, Volume 9, Issue 1–2, pp 17–34 | Cite as

An optimal sonar placement approach for detecting underwater threats under budget limitations

  • Taofeek Biobaku
  • Gino J. Lim
  • Selim Bora
  • Jaeyoung Cho
  • Hamid Parsaei


Providing surveillance to maritime infrastructures against imminent threats is studied in this paper. Surveillance is achieved with the aid of optimally placed sonars. Under a budget-limited deployment strategy involving both static and mobile sonars, a new optimization model using hexagonal grid systems is proposed. Numerical results suggest our approach delivers acceptable detection coverage under a multi-period placement scheme.


Grid system Sonar placement Underwater threat detection Mixed-integer programming Optimization model 


  1. Biobaku T, Lim G, Cho J, Bora S, Parsaei H (2014) Under-water sonar placement. In: Guan Y, Liao H (eds) Proceedings of the Annual Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference, Montreal, Canada. May 31-Jun 3, 2014Google Scholar
  2. Biobaku T, Lim G, Cho J, Bora S, Parsaei H (2015) Literature survey on underwater threat detection. Trans Marit Sci 4(01):14–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borowski B, Sutin A, Roh HS, Bunin B (2008) Passive acoustic threat detection in estuarine environments. In: SPIE Defense and Security Symposium, International Society for Optics and Photonics, p 694513–694513Google Scholar
  4. Chakrabarty K, Iyengar S, Qi H, Cho E (2002) Grid coverage for surveillance and target location in distributed sensor networks. IEEE Trans Comput: 1448–1453Google Scholar
  5. Clouqueur T, Phipatanasuphorn V, Ramanathan P, Saluja KK (2002) Sensor deployment strategy for target detection. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM international workshop on Wireless sensor networks and applications ACM, p 42–48Google Scholar
  6. Dhillon SS, Chakrabarty K (2003) Sensor placement for effective coverage and surveillance in distributed sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference, New Orleans, LA, p 1609–1614Google Scholar
  7. Dhillon SS, Chakrabarty K, Iyengar SS (2002) Sensor placement for grid coverage under imprecise detections. IEEE Proc Int Conf Inf Fusion 2:1581–1587Google Scholar
  8. Esseghir M, Bouabdallah N, Pujolle G (2005) Sensor placement for maximizing wireless sensor network lifetime. IEEE Veh Technol Conf 4:2347–2351Google Scholar
  9. GAMS Development Corporation (2013) General Algebraic Modeling System (GAMS) Release 24.2.1. Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  10. Ghafoori A, Altiok T (2012) A mixed integer programming framework for sonar placement to mitigate maritime security risk. J Transp Secur 5(4):253–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heidemann J, Ye W, Wills J, Syed A, Li Y (2006) Research challenges and applications for underwater sensor networking. IEEE Wirel Commun Netw Conf 1:228–235Google Scholar
  12. Hsieh YC (2003) A linear approximation for redundant reliability problems with multiple component choices. Comput Ind Eng 44(1):91–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. International Maritime Organization, I.M.O. (2014) Integrated technical cooperation programme. Accessed 6 May 2015
  14. Lin F, Chiu P (2005) A near-optimal sensor placement algorithm to achieve complete coverage-discrimination in sensor networks. IEEE Commun Lett 9(1):43–45Google Scholar
  15. Mhatre V, Rosenberg C, Kofman D, Mazumdar R, Shroff N (2005) A minimum cost heterogeneous sensor network with a lifetime constraint. IEEE Trans Mob Comput 4(1):4–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nagy B (2003a) A family of triangular grids in digital geometry. IEEE Proc Int Symp Image Signal Proc Anal 1:101–106Google Scholar
  17. Nagy B (2003b) Shortest paths in triangular grids with neighbourhood sequences. J Comput Inf Technol CIT 11(2):111–122Google Scholar
  18. Nagy B, Strand R (2008) A connection between ℤ n and generalized triangular grids. In: Advances in visual computing. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 1157–1166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ngatchou PN, Fox WL, El-Sharkawi M (2006) Multiobjective multistatic sonar sensor placement. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation. p 2713–2719Google Scholar
  20. Peyvandi H, Roufarshbaf H, Farrokhrooz M, Park S (2011) SONAR systems and underwater signal processing: classic and modern approaches. In: Kolev N (ed) Sonar systems. InTech, Hampshire, pp 173–206Google Scholar
  21. Shakkottai S, Srikant R, Shroff NB (2005) Unreliable sensor grids: coverage, connectivity and diameter. Ad Hoc Netw 3(6):702–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Waite A (2002) Sonar for practicing engineers. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Wang B (2010) Node placement optimization. In: Wang B (ed) Coverage control in sensor networks. Springer Science & Business Media, London, pp 51–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wang W, Srinivasan V, Chua KC (2008) Coverage in hybrid mobile sensor networks. IEEE Trans Mob Comput 7(11):1374–1387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Willis HH (2007) Guiding resource allocations based on terrorism risk. Risk Anal 27(3):597–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Taofeek Biobaku
    • 1
  • Gino J. Lim
    • 1
  • Selim Bora
    • 2
  • Jaeyoung Cho
    • 1
  • Hamid Parsaei
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringUniversity of HoustonHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Texas A&M University at QatarDohaQatar

Personalised recommendations