DOCSLIB.ORG

Feasibility Study of Glass Reinforced Plastic Cargo Ship

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Feasibility Study of Glass Reinforced Plastic Cargo Ship SC-224 FEASIBILITY STUDY OF GLASS REINFORCED PLASTIC CARGO SHIP This document has been approved for public release and sale; its distributionis unlimited. SHIP STRUCTURE COMMITTEE 1971 SHIP STRUCTURE COMMITTEE AN INTERAGENCYADVISORY COMMITTEEOECNCATEDTO IMPROVING THESTRUCTUREOF SHIPS MEMBERAGENCIES: AODRESScORRESPONDENCETO: mm STATESCOASTGUARD SECRETARY NWAt wr SYSTEMScOMMANO SHIPSTRUCTLfRECOMMITTEE MILITARYsEALIfTCOMMAND “,sCOASTGUARDHEADQuARTERS MAfllllMEADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON,DC.205W AMCRICANBIIREAUOFSHIPPING SR 195 1971 The Ship Structure Committee is sponsoring research to investigate the suitability of modem structural materials for ships’ hull structures and to examine changes in design practices necessary to take advantage of tlaeproperties of these materials. This report describes an investigation undertaken to evaluate the technical and economic feasibility of constructing a large cargo ship of glass reinforced plastic (GIU]). The possibility of using this material for hull components is also discussed. Comments on this report are solicited. &..&—a’-. Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Chairman, Ship Structure Committee L SSC-224 Final Technical Report on Project S1l-195 “Reinforced Plastic Ships” FEASIBILITY STUDY OF GLASS REINFORCED PLASTIC CARGO SHIP by Robert J. Scott John H. Sommel la Gibbs & Cox Department of the Navy Naval Ship Engineering Center Contract No. NOO024-70-C-5374 This document has been approved for public release and sale; its distribution is unlimited. U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters Washington, D.C. 1971 ,-—-.. ..- ABSTRACT This study was undertaken to evaluate the technical and economic feasibility of constructing and operating a large glass reinforced plas- tic (GRP) cargo vessel or, alternatively, using GRP for major structural components on a steel cargo ship. The design and fabrication of a large GRP cargo ship is shown to be total ly within the present state-of-the-art, but the long term dura- bility of the structure is questionable. Additional research is required to establish satisfactory confidence in material properties. Experience with existing large GRP vessels is reviewed and extrapolated, where possible, to the large GRP cargo ship. Criteria for the design of the GRP hull structure are presented and justified. ~let:jods of system/equipment installation are reviewed. GRP ship structures are unacceptable under present U.S. Coast Guard fire regulations requiring the use of incombustible materials. The design of a large GRP cargo vessel util izing a composite unidirectional -woven roving 1aminate is presented and compared to the equivalent steel ship. The saving in the structural weight of the GRP ship is 40 per cent. The Ihull is five times as flexible as the steel IIU1l. Cost studies indicate that, for the same return on investment, the Required Freight Rate of the GRP cargo ship is higher than that of the equivalent steel ship for all levels of procurement, Ihull life and for various laminate layup rates considered. Similar studies of con- tainer ships and bulk carriers arrive at similar conclusions. However, major structural components such as deckhouses, hatch covers, king posts and bow modules are shown to be economically justified in some cases. Areas for further research are presented, and furtl~er investi - gations of smaller GRP vessels (150-250 feet long) are proposed since these appear most promising at this time. ii COF!TENTS PAGE I. INTRODUCTION . 1 Background 1 Scope of Study”:::::::: ::::::::::””” . 4 Limitations . 4 Selection of Cargo Ship.::: ::::::::::::: 6 11. MATERIAL AND OESIGW STUi)IES . 9 A REV IEWOFGRP MATERIALS . ‘eo sins...... Reinforcements . Core Materials Physical Properties 15 Physical Properties 19 Creep . 20 Impact Strengtl-l 20 Buckl ing Strength . Secondary Bond...,.,., . % Resistance to Environment and Aging . : : : 22 Abrasion Resistance . , . 24 klaterial Costs . .,..,.,.””””” 24 Selection of GRP’!l;terials . , . : : : : : 25 , B. STRUCTURAL COiKEPTS . Single Skin Vs. Sandwich . Longitudinal Vs. Transverse Framing . : : : : : : : : : : c. OPERATIOiiAL EXPERIENCE WITH EXISTING GRP VESSELS . 27 General Observations 27 Resistance to Environm~n~ : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 27 Abrasion and Impact 27 Repairs......,::::: :::::::”””””” IIaintenance ...,...,. , .,.,..,::”””” . o. FABRICATION FACILITIES AIIO PROCEDURES . 29 Facility Requirements . 29 Proposed Hull Fabrication Procedure . : : : : : : : 30 Quality Control and Inspection . 32 E. FIRE RESISTANCE.. 33 F. Installation/ OF SYSTEMS ANO EQUIPMENT . 35 Material s . 35 Attachment of Equipment . .“: : : : : : : : : : : : : 35 Piping . 35 111 CONTENTS (Cont’dl KAG E II. G. OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF A GRP CARGO SHIP . 36 Mair7tenance . 36 Repairs . 36 Special Surveys . 37 Hull Insurance . 37 H. SUMMARY . 37 111. DESIGN CRITERIA . 39 Existing Criter i . 39 Proposed Criter i - Nidship Section Hull Girder Section. 39 PlodulUS . Proposed Crater; a - Primary Hull Structure . 43 Design Criteria for Plates . 43 Design Criteria for Stiffeners . 45 Alter,]ate Design Criteria . 45 IV. CIESIGN OF GRP CARGO SHIP.... 47 Selection of Principal Dimensions . 47 Design of GRP Midship Section . 47 Hull Girder Deflection . 51 Light Ship \deigiltEstimate . 53 Trim and Stability . 56 v. COST STUD IES . 58 Objectives . 58 Construction Cost Estimates . 58 Life Cycle Economic Studies . 67 Sensitivity Studies . 71 VI. ALTERNATIVE TYPES OF LARGE GRP SHIPS . 79 Container Ship . 79 Bulk Carrier . 84 Other Types of GRP Vessels.. 86 VII. INVESTIGATION OF LARGE GRP STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS 88 Approach . 88 Deckhouse . 89 Cargo King Post . 94 Hatch Covers . 95 Other Components . Summary . lE VIII RECOMMENDED AREAS FOR FURTHER STUDY . 103 General Considerations . 103 GRP Structural Components . 104 costs . 104 iv COIJTENTS (Cent ‘d) PAGE I!aterials . 106 Fire Resi stance . .,..,.,,.,,, . 107 Oesign Criteria . 107 Deflections . 108 Fabrication Procedures 109 Quality Control and Insp~c~i~n’ : : : : : : : : : : : 109 itaintenance and Repair Costs 110 Structural iletails . :::::::::::: 110 Ix. CONCLUSIONS AIIO RECOIWIEliOATIO1/S . 112 Conclusion s . 112 Recommendations . 115 LIST OF REFEREilCES . 116 APPEiJDIX A. LIETERI!II{ATIOIJOF IIAXIIIUMACQUISITION COST OF GF?P COMPONENTS 119 FOR EQUIVALENT LIFE CYCLE COST WITH STEEL CONPOPIENT Rasic Assumptions for Study . , 119 Procedure 119 Results.:::::::::: ::::::::::: 11!2 ******** -v- LIST OF FIGUP.ES FIGURE NO, PAGE 1. General Arrangement - S.S. JAMES L:~.:Es . ,.. 7 2, Midship Section - S.S. JAMES LY,WS . 8 3. S-N Curves of Steel and GRP Laminates . 19 4. Proposed Hul 1 Ilolding and Layup Procedure . 31 5. IIidship Section - Composite Laminate GRP . 50 Construction 6. Construction Cost Estimates - Steel and GRP Cargo . 65 Vessels 7. Required Freight Rate - Steel and GRP Cargo Vessels - . 73 20 Year Life 8. Requi red Freight Rate - Steel and GRP Cargo Vessels - . 73 30 Year Life 9. General Arrangement - Container Sihip . 80 10. General Arrangement - Bulk Carrier MV CHALLENGER . 85 11. Allowable Increase in Acquisition Cost of GRP . 90 Components 12. Cross Section Through Typical Steel and GRP Hatch . 96 Covers 13. Possible GRP80w Module . ...101 vi ~“ LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO. PAGE 1. Principal Characteristics - s’.s. JAMES LYK%S . 6 2. Physical Properties of Typical Narine GRP Laminates . 16 3. Average Physical Properties - Unidirectional GRP . 17 Laminates 4. Approxim~te Physical Properties of Woven Roving - . 18 Unidirectional Composite Laminate 5. Average Physical Properties - Core Materials . 18 6. Chemical Resistance of Typical GRP Resins . ,. 23 7. GRPllaterialC oat. ...24 8. Safety Factor Coefficients - GRP Laminates .. , . , 42 ~. Coefficients for Determining GRP Plate Thickness . 44 10. Oesign Loads and Safety Factors - GRP Hul 1 Structure . 46 11. Comparison of Steel and GRP ~lidship Sections . 51 12. Light Ship Weight Estimate - Steel Construction . , . 53 13. Weight Reduction Coefficients - Hull Structure . 54 14. Weight Reduction Coefficients - Outfit , , . 55 15. Light Ship Weight Estimate - Composite GRP Construction . 55 16. Trim and Stability - Full Load Departure Condition . , 56 17. Trim and Stability - 1/2 Consumables, 1/2 Cargo . 57 18. Estimated Cost of Steel Cargo Ship . 58 19. Estimated Costs of GRP Midship section structure . , . 61 20. Hull Structure Costs for Each of Five GRP Ships . 62 21. Constriction Cost Estimate Summary - Steel Cargo Vessel - 63 20 Year Life vii — LIST OF TABLES (Cent’d) TABLE !dO PAGE 22. Construction Cost Esti’ te Summary - GRP Cargo. 64 Vessel 23. Summary of Life Cycle Costs for Steel and GRP . 72 Cargo Ship 24. Summary of Sensitivity Studies A t!?rougl?E . 76-77 25. Summary of Sensitivity Study F - Fire-Retardant . 78 Resins 26. Summary of Sensitivity Study G - Deadweight . 73 Utilization 27. Principal Characteristics - Steel Container Ship . 79 28. Light Ship Meight Estimates - Steel and GRP . 81 Container Ships 29. Construction Cost - Steel and GRP Container Ships . 81 30. Summary of Life Cycle Costs for Steel and GRP . 83 Container Ship 31. Principal Characteristics - Bulk Carrier . 84 MV CHALLENGER 32, Light Snip Weight Estimates - Steel , Aluminum . 84 and GRP Bulk Carriers 33. Construction Cost - Steel , Aluminum and GRP 8ulk . 86 Carriers 34. Scantlings - GRP and Steel Deckhouses . g2 35. Weight Comparison - GRP and Steel Deckhouses . 93 36. Construction Cost Comparison - GRP and Steel . 93 Deckhouses 37. %antlings - GRP and Steel King Posts . 95 A-1 Allowable Increase in Acquisition Cost of GRP . IZO Components Vlll — —- SHIP
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Section 3 2018 Edition
    S e c ti o n 3 Vessel Requirements 3.1 Definitions, p. 2 3.2 Size and Draft Limitations of Vessels, p. 4 3.3 Requirement for Pilot Platforms and Shelters on Certain Vessels, p. 16 3.4 Navigation Bridge Features Required of Transiting Vessels, p. 19 3.5 Requirements for Non-Self-Propelled Vessels, p. 31 3.6 Vessels Requiring Towing Services, p. 32 3.7 Deckload Cargo, p. 33 3.8 Construction, Number and Location of Chocks and Bitts, p. 34 3.9 Mooring Lines, Anchors and Deck Machinery, p. 41 3.10 Boarding Facilities, p. 41 3.11 Definite Phase-out of Single-Hull Oil Tankers, p. 47 3.12 Admeasurement System for Full Container Vessels, p. 48 3.13 Deck-loaded Containers on Ships not Built for Container Carriage, p. 49 3.14 Unauthorized Modification to the PC/UMS Net Tonnage Certificate, p. 50 3.15 Calculation of PC/UMS Net Tonnage on Passenger Vessels, p. 51 3.16 Dangerous Cargo Requirements, p. 51 3.17 Cargo Regulated Under MARPOL Annex II, p. 58 3.18 Pre-Arrival Cargo Declarations, Security Inspection and Escort, p. 58 3.19 Hot Work Performed On Board Vessels, p. 60 1 OP Operations Manual Section 3 2018 Edition 3.20 Manning Requirements, p. 61 3.21 Additional Pilots Due to Vessel Deficiencies, p. 62 3.22 Pilot Accommodations Aboard Transiting Vessels, p. 63 3.23 Main Source of Electric Power, p. 63 3.24 Emergency Source of Electrical Power, p. 63 3.25 Sanitary Facilities and Sewage Handling, p.
    [Show full text]
  • ONI-54-A.Pdf
    r~us U. S. FLEET TRAIN- Division cf Naval Intelligence-Identification and Characteristics Section e AD Destroyer Tenders Page AP Troop Transports Pa g e t Wo "'W" i "~ p. 4-5 z MELVILLE 28 5 BURROWS 14 3, 4 DOBBIN Class 4 7 WHARTON 9 9 BLACK HAWK 28 21, 22 WAKEFIELD Class 12 11, 12 ALTAIR Class 28 23 WEST POINT 13 14, 15, 17-19 DIXIE Class 7 24 ORIZABA 13 16 CASCADE 10 29 U. S. GRANT 14 20,21 HAMUL Class 22 31, 3Z CHATEAU THIERRY Class 9 33 REPUBLIC 14 AS Submarine Tenders 41 STRATFORD 14 3 HOLLAND 5 54, 61 HERMIT AGE Class 13 5 BEAVER 16 63 ROCHAMBEAU 12 11, 12, 15 19 FULTON Class 7 67 DOROTHEA L. DIX 25 Sin a ll p. H 13, 14 GRIFFIN Class 22 69- 71,76 ELIZ . STANTON Cla ss 23 20 OTUS 26 72 SUSAN B. ANTHONY 15 21 AN TEA US 16 75 GEMINI 17 77 THURSTON 20 AR Repair Ships 110- "GENERAL" Class 10 1 MEDUSA 5 W orld W ar I types p. 9 3, 4 PROMETHEUS Class 28 APA Attack Transports 5- VULCAN Class 7 1, 11 DOYEN Class 30 e 9, 12 DELTA Class 22 2, 3, 12, 14- 17 HARRIS Class 9 10 ALCOR 14 4, 5 McCAWLEY , BARNETT 15 11 RIGEL 28 6-9 HEYWOOD Class 15 ARH Hull Repair Ships 10, 23 HARRY LEE Class 14 Maritime types p. 10-11 13 J T. DICKMAN 9 1 JASON 7 18-zo; 29, 30 PRESIDENT Class 10 21, 28, 31, 32 CRESCENT CITY Class 11 .
    [Show full text]
  • The Liberty Ships of World War Ii
    THE LIBERTY SHIPS OF WORLD WAR II Their Union County and Other Carolina Connections by Bill Lee Dedicated to the men of the American Merchant Marine and the United States Naval Armed Guard who sailed in harm’s way in Liberty Ships during World War II … …and who did not return. 2 ~ INTRODUCTION ~ America’s wartime merchant fleet made one of the more important contributions to victory in World War II. An all-volunteer civilian workforce of Merchant Mariners sailed thousands of vessels in harm’s way throughout that global conflict. These men paid a high price for their success, suffering the highest casualty rate of any service. Without their support, our armed forces could not have even gotten overseas, much less been properly supplied as they fought their way to victory. A major element of America’s wartime merchant fleet was a huge class of vessels known as the Liberty Ships. More Liberty Ships were built than any other class of sea-going vessels in the history of the world. Numbering 2,710, they were all mass-produced in less than five years. This astounding accomplishment took place in the middle of a world war that placed extreme demands on the capabilities of the United States and its allies. Not only did the men and women of America build Liberty Ships at an unprecedented rate, they also first constructed entire new shipyards for the sole purpose of building Liberty Ships. One of these shipyards was in North Carolina. Two others were built and successfully operated by Charlotteans who had no prior experience in shipbuilding.
    [Show full text]
  • US Maritime Administration
    U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) Shipping and Shipbuilding Support Programs January 8, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R46654 SUMMARY R46654 U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) January 8, 2021 Shipping and Shipbuilding Support Programs Ben Goldman The U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) is one of the 11 operating administrations of the Analyst in Transportation U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). Its mission is to develop the merchant maritime Policy industry of the United States. U.S. maritime policy, largely set out by the Merchant Marine Acts of 1920 and 1936 and with some roots in even older legislation, is codified in Subtitle V of Chapter 46 of the U.S. Code. As currently articulated, it is the policy of the United States to “encourage and aid the development and maintenance of a merchant marine” that meets the objectives below, which MARAD helps to achieve via the following programs and activities: Carry domestic waterborne commerce and a substantial part of the waterborne export and import foreign commerce of the United States. International shipping is dominated by companies using foreign- owned or foreign-registered vessels taking advantage of comparatively lower operating costs. The MARAD Maritime Security Program (MSP) supports U.S.-flagged ships engaged in international commerce by providing annual subsidies to defray the operating costs of up to 60 vessels. Originally scheduled to expire at the end of 2025, authorization for MSP was extended through 2035 by the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2020 (P.L. 116-92). Similar programs were established to support tankers and cable-laying ships, either in that same law or in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2021 (P.L.
    [Show full text]
  • Adventures of a Landing Craft Coxswain Sterling S
    Adventures of a Landing Craft Coxswain Sterling S. Funck United States Navy, 1941 - 1945 Boatswain Mate 1st Class Golden Shellback Christian A. Funck Contents Preface........................................................................................................................................... iv Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... v Introduction.................................................................................................................................. vi Key Concepts............................................................................................................................ vii Common Abbreviations...........................................................................................................viii Chronology ................................................................................................................................vi Operations in North Africa and Europe..................................................................................... ix Operations in the Central Pacific ............................................................................................... x Pre-War Years .............................................................................................................................. 1 The War Begins............................................................................................................................. 2 Boot Camp
    [Show full text]
  • Revolutionizing Short Sea Shipping Positioning Report
    Revolutionizing short sea shipping Positioning Report Magnus Gustafsson Tomi Nokelainen Anastasia Tsvetkova Kim Wikström Åbo Akademi University Revolutionizing short sea shipping Positioning Report Executive summary Shipping in the Baltic Sea forms an essential part of Finnish • Establishing real-time integrated production and logistic industry. At present, the utilization rate of bulk and general planning to ensure optimized just-in-time freight through- cargo ships serving Finland is under 40%, and the old-fash- out the logistic chain. ioned routines in ports lead to ships sailing at non-optimal • Introducing a new cargo handling concept developed by speeds and thereby to unnecessary fuel consumption. Lack of MacGregor that reduces turnaround time in ports, maxi- transparency and coordination between the large numbers of mizes cargo space utilization, and secures cargo handling actors in logistical chains is the key reason for inefficiencies in quality. sea transportation, operations in ports, and land transporta- • Employing a performance-driven shipbuilding and opera- tion. Addressing these inefficiencies could increase the com- tion business model that ensures a highly competitive ship petitiveness of Finnish industry, and, at the same time, create by keeping world-leading technology providers engaged a basis for significant exports. throughout the lifecycle of vessels. By changing the business models and ways of working • Implementing new financing models that integrate insti- it would be possible to lower cargo transportation costs by tutional investors with a long-term investment perspective 25-35% and emissions by 30-35% in the dry bulk and general in order to reduce the cost of capital and put the focus on cargo logistics in the Baltic Sea area.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Shipping: Choosing the Best Method of Transport
    Global Shipping: Choosing the Best Method of Transport When shipping freight internationally, it’s important to choose the appropriate mode of transportation to ensure your products arrive on time and at the right cost. Your decision to ship by land, sea, or air depends on a careful evaluation of business needs and a comparison of the benefits each method affords. Picking the best possible mode of transportation is critical to export success. Shipping by truck Shipping by truck is a popular method of freight transport used worldwide, though speed and quality of service decline outside of industrialized areas. Even if you choose to ship your products by sea or air, a truck is usually responsible for delivering the goods from the port of arrival to their final destination. When shipping by truck, the size of your shipment will determine whether you need less- than-truckload (LTL) or truckload (TL) freight. LTL involves smaller orders, and makes up the majority of freight shipments. The average piece of LTL freight weighs about 1,200 pounds and is the size of a single pallet. However, LTL freight can range from 100 to 15,000 pounds. Beyond this limit, your shipment is likely to be classified as truckload freight. It is more economical for large shipments to utilize the space and resources of a single motor carrier, instead of being mixed with other shipments and reloaded into several different vehicles along the route. TL providers generally charge a ‘per mile’ rate, which can vary depending on distance, items being shipped, equipment, and service times.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation of Abandoned WW II Wrecks in Palau
    Investigation of Abandoned WW II Wrecks in Palau Tomo Ishimura1 Abstract Over forty Japanese vessels were sunken in the water of Palau during WWII. Some wrecks sunk in the shallow water at a depth of 20 meters or less and were salvaged. Other wrecks at 30 meters depth or more still remain and are legally protected by the authority of Palau Government but are seriously threatened by illegal treasure hunters. Initial efforts to identify human remains of Japanese soldiers were made in 2005. As part of an archaeology advisory team for the Japanese Government I carried out underwater surveys of sunken WWII vessels in Palau. In 2010 and 2011, I conducted investigations of the WWII vessels again, together with on-shore research on sites and features associated with the Japanese occupation period, funded by the Takanashi Foundation for Arts and Archaeology (Japan). The research revealed that the most of the vessels sunken in Palau were not genuine military vessels of Japanese Imperial Navy or Army but converted vessels originally built for non-combat purposes. These vessels were slow in speed and not well-equipped for combat activity. Most of them were destroyed by American aerial bombing on March 30th 1944. The evening before (March 29th) the main force of the Japanese Combined Fleet, including its flagship Musashi, retreated from Palau. It is clear that the vessels left in Palau were abandoned as a “third wheel” of the Combined Fleet. These abandoned-converted vessels include cargo carriers, tankers, whaling boats and fishing boats. This implies that Japanese troops were experiencing a difficult and desperate campaign at that time.
    [Show full text]
  • RO-RO Cargo Vessel FERRIES & RO-RO, YACHTS, HIGH SPEED BOATS
    RO-RO Cargo Vessel FERRIES & RO-RO, YACHTS, HIGH SPEED BOATS 27,000 DWT Builder / Yard No.: Shipyard 3. MAJ / 2788 Owner / Flag: CMA-CGM / BAHAMAS Designed by: Shipyard 3. MAJ The vessel is RO-RO ship suitable to carry containers, trucks, trailers, general cargo and cars and vans on hoistable deck. Cargo space is divided into two (2) forward cargo holds with 40’ cellguides and one (1) cargo space divided with decks into three (3) garages, and cargo space on weatherdeck with container fittings. Double bottom and side arranged for ballast water, HFO and antiheeling tanks. The ship’s hull is specially equipped for in-water surveys. Engine room is equipped for unattended operation. Classification: BV Cargo equipment I W HULL W MACH • Stern quarter ramp: 46.5 m (incl. flap) x 12.0 m/250 t RO-RO cargo ship, equipped for capacity, four (4) wheels axle load 60 t carriage of containers • Stern door: 27.0 m x 7.0 m Unrestricted navigation • Car decks: W AUT-UMS, W SYS-NEQ1 2A area abt. 2300 m2 eleven (11) hoisting panels MON-SHAFT, INWATER SURVEY 3A area abt. 3480 m2 seventeen (17) hoisting panels, starboard aft panel use as ramp Length overall (extreme) 211.60 m • Fixed ramp lower deck to tank top: 28.3 m x 8.0 m with Length between perpendiculars 190.00 m gastight hydraulically operated ramp cover Breadth, moulded 32.20 m middle deck to lower deck: 57.4 m x 12.0 m with Depth, moulded to weather deck 22.70 m watertight hydraulically operated ramp cover Design draught (extreme) 10.50 m middle to weather deck: 53.4 m x 8.0 m with Deadweight at design draught 26,700 t watertight hydraulically operated ramp cover Main engine 3.
    [Show full text]
  • A Novel Cargo Ship Detection and Directional Discrimination Method for Remote Sensing Image Based on Lightweight Network
    Journal of Marine Science and Engineering Article A Novel Cargo Ship Detection and Directional Discrimination Method for Remote Sensing Image Based on Lightweight Network Pan Wang, Jianzhong Liu *, Yinbao Zhang, Zhiyang Zhi, Zhijian Cai and Nannan Song School of Geoscience and Technology, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China; [email protected] (P.W.); [email protected] (Y.Z.); [email protected] (Z.Z.); [email protected] (Z.C.); [email protected] (N.S.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Recently, cargo ship detection in remote sensing images based on deep learning is of great significance for cargo ship monitoring. However, the existing detection network is not only unable to realize autonomous operation on spaceborne platforms due to the limitation of computing and storage, but the detection result also lacks the directional information of the cargo ship. In order to address the above problems, we propose a novel cargo ship detection and directional discrimination method for remote sensing images based on a lightweight network. Specifically, we design an efficient and lightweight feature extraction network called the one-shot aggregation and depthwise separable network (OSADSNet), which is inspired by one-shot feature aggregation modules and depthwise separable convolutions. Additionally, we combine the RPN with the K-Mean++ algorithm to obtain the K-RPN, which can produce a more suitable region proposal for cargo ship detection. Citation: Wang, P.; Liu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Furthermore, without introducing extra parameters, the directional discrimination of the cargo ship Zhi, Z.; Cai, Z.; Song, N. A Novel is transformed into a classification task, and the directional discrimination is completed when the Cargo Ship Detection and Directional detection task is completed.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Concepts of Maritime Transport and Its Present Status in Latin America and the Caribbean
    or. iH"&b BASIC CONCEPTS OF MARITIME TRANSPORT AND ITS PRESENT STATUS IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN . ' ftp • ' . J§ WAC 'At 'li ''UWD te. , • • ^ > o UNITED NATIONS 1 fc r> » t 4 CR 15 n I" ti i CUADERNOS DE LA CEP AL BASIC CONCEPTS OF MARITIME TRANSPORT AND ITS PRESENT STATUS IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN UNITED NATIONS Santiago, Chile, 1987 LC/G.1426 September 1987 This study was prepared by Mr Tnmas Sepûlveda Whittle. Consultant to ECLAC's Transport and Communications Division. The opinions expressed here are the sole responsibility of the author, and do not necessarily coincide with those of the United Nations. Translated in Canada for official use by the Multilingual Translation Directorate, Trans- lation Bureau, Ottawa, from the Spanish original Los conceptos básicos del transporte marítimo y la situación de la actividad en América Latina. The English text was subse- quently revised and has been extensively updated to reflect the most recent statistics available. UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS Sales No. E.86.II.G.11 ISSN 0252-2195 ISBN 92-1-121137-9 * « CONTENTS Page Summary 7 1. The importance of transport 10 2. The predominance of maritime transport 13 3. Factors affecting the shipping business 14 4. Ships 17 5. Cargo 24 6. Ports 26 7. Composition of the shipping industry 29 8. Shipping conferences 37 9. The Code of Conduct for Liner Conferences 40 10. The Consultation System 46 * 11. Conference freight rates 49 12. Transport conditions 54 13. Marine insurance 56 V 14.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Liberty'cargo Ship
    ‘LIBERTY’ CARGO SHIP FEATURE ARTICLE written by James Davies for KEY INFORMATION Country of Origin: United States of America Manufacturers: Alabama Dry Dock Co, Bethlehem-Fairfield Shipyards Inc, California Shipbuilding Corp, Delta Shipbuilding Co, J A Jones Construction Co (Brunswick), J A Jones Construction Co (Panama City), Kaiser Co, Marinship Corp, New England Shipbuilding Corp, North Carolina Shipbuilding Co, Oregon Shipbuilding Corp, Permanente Metals Co, St Johns River Shipbuilding Co, Southeastern Shipbuilding Corp, Todd Houston Shipbuilding Corp, Walsh-Kaiser Co. Major Variants: General cargo, tanker, collier, (modifications also boxed aircraft transport, tank transport, hospital ship, troopship). Role: Cargo transport, troop transport, hospital ship, repair ship. Operated by: United States of America, Great Britain, (small quantity also Norway, Belgium, Soviet Union, France, Greece, Netherlands and other nations). First Laid Down: 30th April 1941 Last Completed: 30th October 1945 Units: 2,711 ships laid down, 2,710 entered service. Released by WW2Ships.com USA OTHER SHIPS www.WW2Ships.com FEATURE ARTICLE 'Liberty' Cargo Ship © James Davies Contents CONTENTS ‘Liberty’ Cargo Ship ...............................................................................................................1 Key Information .......................................................................................................................1 Contents.....................................................................................................................................2
    [Show full text]