Future Development of Ultra Large Container Ships Where Are the Limits?

MARITIME

Future development of ultra large container ships Where are the limits?

Jost Bergmann 2014-04-08

. Driving factors . Main particulars – Length – Beam – Draft – Depth – Air draft . Other factors – Propulsion concepts – LNG fuel . Conclusion

UASC, MSC, CSCL 18k+

MAERSK triple-E

MAERSK E-series

TEU

MAERSK S-series

Year build

Bay 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Row 13 3,500 TEU 3,500 TEU 3,650 TEU 4,300 TEU 4,900 TEU 5,060 TEU (32.25 m) (212 m) (225.5 m) (254 m) (262 m) (275 m) (283 m) Panamax 14 4,250 TEU 4,500 TEU (35.0 m) (253.4 m) (268.5 m) 15 3,600 TEU 4,500 TEU 4,600 TEU 4,900 TEU (37.5 m) (219 m) (249 m) (254.7 m) (269.2 m) 16 5,500 TEU 5,900 TEU 6,800 TEU (40.0 m) (257.4 m) (273.45 m) (300 m) 17 7,090 TEU 8,063 TEU 8,600 TEU (42.8 m) (300 m) (323 m) (334 m) 18 8000 TEU 9,000 TEU 9,200 TEU 10,000 TEU (45.6 m) (300 m) (320 m) (336.7 m) (349.7 m) 19 8,800 TEU 11,500 TEU 12,600 TEU (48.2 m) New (300 m) (349.7 m) (366 m) 20 Panamax 13,300 TEU 14,000 TEU (51.2 m) (366 m) (383 m) 21 14,800 TEU 16,000 TEU (54.0 m) (383 m) (399 m) 22 Emma M CMA CGM (56.2 m) (397m) (396 m) 23 19,000 TEU (59.0 m) (396 m)

. Economy of scale exist even for the step from 18k to 21k TEU . What else could be the limiting factors?

. Driving factors . Main particulars – Length – Beam – Draft – Depth – Air draft . Other factors – Propulsion concepts – LNG fuel . Conclusion

. Ship length has large influence on ship strength . delta length has a square effect . delta length is approximately 14,60 m (one bay) . delta width has a linear effect . delta width is approximately 2,50 m . Other aspects related to ship length – Harbour restrictions – Turning basin diameter – Quay length etc.

. Plate thickness up to 100 mm in upper part . Benefit of EH 47 steel is only 3 mm compared to EH 40 . BUT: Strength in bottom structure becoming critical as well!

10 DNV GL © 2013 2014-04-08 18k max - One hold more? . L = 429,2 m (26 bays) An even number of 40´bays is needed between the engine room . B = 58,6 m (23 rows) and deck house area due to . Hold damage stability requirements! – Tiers = 11 – Rows = 21 (19 in lower tier) . Deck – Tiers = 11 – Rows = 25 (23 in upper tier) . Nominal TEU = about 20.760

11 DNV GL © 2013 2014-04-08 Beam . Basically aligned with container raster . Limitations – Ship design and operation – Strength – Transverse strength – TBHD deflection – Stability – Transverse accelerations – Other – Harbour/ crane outreach – Seaways – Suez Canal – B = 58,6 m – T max = 16,13 m – B = 61,2 m – T max = 15,44 m HISTORY… – B = 63,8 m – T max = 14,81 m

18k ULCS – One or two rows wider? . L = 400 m . L = 400 m . B = 61,2 m (24 rows) . B = 63,8 m (25 rows) . TEU = about 20.750 . TEU = about 21.700

13 DNV GL © 2013 2014-04-08 Draft . ULCV’s normally have – T design about 14,5 m – T scantling about 16,0 m . Scantling draft seldom fully utilized – Average weight of containers – Most relevant for last loading & first discharge port (can be adapted) . Draft restrictions – Harbours/ terminals – Seaways – Rivers – Canals

. High cube design

. Max. tier(9’6”/8’6”): 10 tiers / 11 30200 H S H S tiers 25580 H S . ISO container is the limiting factor H S . Max. depth around 30,40 m S 2910 10 tiers H 11 tiers S H S Passage way 481 H 970 S 10 tiers Pipe Tunnel H S H – 9’6” H S – 8’6” 166 S H S 2300

. Air draught during loading and unloading . Emma Maersk in Kobe 2006

Air draught Port needed draught from water level

Bayonne Bridge 46,00 m 19,90 m Gerald Desmond Bridge- POLB 47,55 m 18,35 m Osaka Bay Bridge 47,30 m 18,60 m Chiwan Bridge – Hong Kong 53,00 m 12,90 m Koehlbrand Bridge 53,00 m 12,90 m

. Maximum height is based on . 10 tiers high cube in the cargo hold . 10 tier high cube on the hatch cover . Telescope type radar . 1 meter margin . Golden Gate and Oakland Bridge have a sufficient air draught at US ports

. Driving factors . Main particulars – Length – Beam – Draft – Depth – Air draft . Other factors – Propulsion concepts – LNG fuel . Conclusion

18 DNV GL © 2013 2014-04-08 Single or twin main engine /screw concept . Both concepts could be realized for wide beam ships . Maximum speed requirement of about 22 kn is no limiting factor . Propeller dimension for single engine concept reasonable / realistic still . Needed power is no limiting factor to built larger container ships

. MAN B&W 11(12) S90-ME9.2 . MAN B&W 7(8) S80-ME9.2 (63,910/69,720kW x 84rpm) (31,570/36,080kW x 78rpm) . Wartsila 11(12) X92 . Wartsila 7(8) RT-flex82T (64,350/70,200kW x 80rpm) (31,640/36,160kW x 80rpm)

40 days range on HFO 33 days range on HFO 7 days range on HFO 7 days range on LNG 33 days range on LNG

. LNG tanks require more space than HFO . For larger LNG volumes prismatic tanks are more suitable . Enlarged ship length due to LNG tanks to keep the same nominal capacity will maybe occur?

. Driving factors . Main particulars – Length – Beam – Draft – Depth – Air draft . Other factors – Propulsion concepts – LNG fuel . Conclusion

Bay 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Row 13 3,500 TEU 3,500 TEU 3,650 TEU 4,300 TEU 4,900 TEU 5,060 TEU

(32.25 m) (212 m) (225.5 m) (254 m) (262 m) (275 m) (283 m) Panamax 14 4,250 TEU 4,500 TEU

(35.0 m) (253.4 m) (268.5 m)

15 3,600 TEU 4,500 TEU 4,600 TEU 4,900 TEU

(37.5 m) (219 m) (249 m) (254.7 m) (269.2 m)

16 5,500 TEU 5,900 TEU 6,800 TEU

(40.0 m) (257.4 m) (273.45 m) (300 m)

17 7,090 TEU 8,063 TEU 8,600 TEU

(42.8 m) (300 m) (323 m) (334 m)

18 8000 TEU 9,000 TEU 9,200 TEU 10,000 TEU

(45.6 m) (300 m) (320 m) (336.7 m) (349.7 m)

19 8,800 TEU 11,500 TEU 12,600 TEU (48.2 m) New (300 m) (349.7 m) (366 m) 20 Panamax 13,300 TEU 14,000 TEU (51.2 m) (366 m) (383 m)

21 14,800 TEU 16,000 TEU

(54.0 m) (383 m) (399 m)

22 Emma M CMA CGM

(56.2 m) (397m) (399 m)

23 19,000 TEU 20,800 TEU

(58.6 m) (396 m) (429 m)

24 20,750 TEU

(61.2 m) (396 m)

25 21,700 TEU 22,750 TEU

(63,8 m) (396 m) (429 m)

24 DNV GL © 2013 2014-04-08 18k ULCS- one hold longer & two rows wider? . L = 429,2 m (26 bays) . B = 63,8 m (25 rows) . Hold – Tiers = 11 – Rows = 23 (21 in lower tier) . Deck – Tiers = 11 – Rows = 25 (23 in upper tier) . Nominal TEU = about 22.750

25 DNV GL © 2013 2014-04-08 Summary . Economy of scale is reducing transportation costs per TEU provided sufficient utilization . Hull structural design has several limiting factors considering present typical layouts . More easy to increase beam compared with increasing length . Wide beam designs have to cope with increased acceleration and GM values . Single or twin main engine / propeller concepts are realized at present and LNG will be a typical fuel in the future . Most harbors could serve large container ships but air draft/ under crane clearance could be critical for intermediate loading conditions

Unprotected Opening

4 3 0 0 o o

Evolution of Large Crude Carriers in the 1970’s

Size levelled out at about 320.000 DWT

Could this happen to the container ship segment as well?

Source: Malaccamax report

27 Future development of container ships

Jost Bergmann, Business director container ships [email protected] +49 151 4066 9182

www.dnvgl.com

SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER