Path Planning of a New Undersea Telecommunications Cable with Consideration of Crossing Angle with Existing Cables
Rattachement africain : hk, cn, au. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Undersea telecommunication cables are critical components of the global infrastructure, with nearly every coastal nation connected via these "seabed highways." As of early 2025, there are over 600 active and planned undersea cables worldwide, spanning approximately 1.48 million kilometers and transmitting 99% of global internet traffic. Traditional manual path planning methods are inefficient and often result in suboptimal cable paths, making them difficult to account simultaneously for a range of natural factors and human activities that could impact cable cost and reliability. Notably, existing research overlooks planning guidelines recommended by the International Cable Protection Committee (ICPC), which emphasize minimization of proximity between new and existing cables. In this study, we introduce the ICPC-recommended cable crossing constraint into our previously developed automated route planning framework. Specifically, we adopt the Ordered Upwind Method to ensure that, when crossings are unavoidable, new cables intersect existing ones at an angle as close to 90° as possible. If a right-angle crossing is not feasible, a minimum angle of 45° is enforced. By incorporating this constraint into automated cable path planning, our approach aims to enhance the safety, maintainability, and long-term operability of both new and existing undersea cable systems.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Path Planning of a New Undersea Telecommunications Cable with Consideration of Crossing Angle with Existing Cables
- Date Crossref
- 06/07/2025
- Éditeur
- IEEE
- Type
- proceedings-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.