DOCSLIB.ORG

Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Common Structural Rules for Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers 01 January 2021 Release COMMON STRUCTURAL RULES FOR BULK CARRIERS AND OIL TANKERS TECHNICAL BACKGROUND RULE REFERENCE This document is an updated version of the Technical Background Rule Reference for Common Structural Rules for Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers following the publication of the 01 Jan 2021 Rules. The document was updated on the basis of “TBRF Change Proposal (Jan 2021)”, “TBRF Change Proposal (Feb 2021) (Based on KCs)”, “Technical Background for Rule Change Notice 1 to 01 Jan 2020 version” and “TBRF Change Proposal (June 2021)”. Table of Contents Part 1 : General Hull Requirements Part 2 : Ship Types PART 1 GENERAL HULL REQUIREMENTS Table of Contents Chapter 1: Rule General Principles Chapter 2: General Arrangement Design Chapter 3: Structural Design Principles Chapter 4: Loads Chapter 5: Hull Girder Strength Chapter 6: Hull Local Scantling Chapter 7: Direct Strength Analysis Chapter 8: Buckling Chapter 9: Fatigue Chapter 10: Other Structures Chapter 11: Superstructure, Deckhouses and Hull Outfitting Chapter 12: Construction Chapter 13: Ship in Operation - Renewal Criteria PART 1 CHAPTER1 RULE GENERAL PRINCIPLES Table of Contents SECTION 1 Application 1 Scope of Application 2 Rule Application 3 Class Notations 4 Application of the Rules of the Society SECTION 2 Rule Principles 1 General 2 General Assumptions 3 Design Basis 4 Design Principles 5 Rule Design Methods SECTION 3 Verification of Compliance 1 General 2 Documents to be Submitted 3 Scope of Approval 4 Workmanship 5 Structural Details 6 Equivalence Procedures SECTION 4 Symbols and Definitions 1 Primary Symbols and Units 2 Symbols 3 Definitions SECTION 5 Loading Manual and Loading Instruments 1 General Requirements 2 Loading Manuals 3 Loading Instrument 4 Loading Specific to Bulk Carriers PT 1, CH 1, SEC 1 – APPLICATION COMMON STRUCTURAL RULES 1 SCOPE OF APPLICATION 1.1 General 1.1.1 These regulations clearly define the application of harmonised Common Structural Rules (CSR-H) for bulk carriers and oil tankers. 1.1.2 These regulations give the typical structural arrangement of the ships concerned by the Rules. 1.1.3 Technical background is not considered necessary. 1.2 Scope of application for bulk carriers 1.2.1 The Rules apply to bulk carriers of length 90m and greater of typical arrangement fitted with a double bottom structure and side structure of single skin or double skin construction and constructed generally with a single deck and, in the cargo holds, with topside tanks and bilge hopper tanks. The word “generally” means that ships fitted with top side and hopper tanks have a typical bulk carrier arrangement, but CSR are applicable to other arrangements, for example hybrid type bulk carriers. A hybrid bulk carrier is a bulk carrier where at least one cargo hold is constructed with hopper tank and topside tank. It clearly means that these Rules apply to bulk carriers without topside nor hopper tanks in some holds and having hopper tank and top side tank in remaining hold. This is in line with the interpretation of the expression “constructed generally with single deck, top-side tanks and hopper side tanks in cargo area“, which means, according to MSC Res. 277(85), that ships are not considered outside the definition of bulk carriers only on the grounds that they lack some or all of the specified constructional features. The expression “intended primarily to carry dry cargoes in bulk” is to be understood in the same way as MSC Res. 277(85). The text of MSC Res. 277(85) says: ““primarily to carry dry cargo in bulk” means primarily designed to carry dry cargoes in bulk and to transport cargoes which are carried, and loaded or discharged, in bulk, and which occupy the ship’s cargo spaces exclusively or predominantly”. Ore carriers and combination carriers are excluded from the scope of application of the Rules due to their typical arrangement (see Figure 1). TECHNICAL BACKGROUND RULE REFERENCE PT 1, CH 1, SEC 1/PAGE 1 PT 1, CH 1, SEC 1 – APPLICATION COMMON STRUCTURAL RULES Figure 1: Typical structural arrangement for Ore Carriers The Rules also exclude from its scope of application the following ship types: • Woodchip carrier. • Cement, fly ash and sugar carriers provided that loading and unloading is not carried out by grabs heavier than 10 tons, power shovels and other means which may damage cargo hold structure. • Ships with inner bottom construction adapted for self-unloading. The same ship types are excluded from MSC Res. 277(85). The definition of bulk carriers covered by the Rules is in accordance with the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) and MSC Res. 277(85), excepted for the pure ore carriers and combination carriers due to their typical structural arrangement as mentioned above. The references to SOLAS and MSC Res. 277(85), adopted on 28 November 2008 are given for reference. 1.3 Scope of application of oil tankers 1.3.1 Length and structural arrangement application Technical background is not considered necessary. 1.3.2 Cargo temperature application This requirement is in accordance with CSR OT (July 2010) Sec 2, 3.1.8.4. Ships with cargo design temperature outside the range (0°C to 80°C) are subject to additional requirements as specified by the Society. TECHNICAL BACKGROUND RULE REFERENCE PT 1, CH 1, SEC 1/PAGE 2 PT 1, CH 1, SEC 1 – APPLICATION COMMON STRUCTURAL RULES 2 RULE APPLICATION 2.1 Rule description 2.1.1 Rule structure Technical background is not considered necessary. 2.1.2 Numbering Technical background is not considered necessary. 2.2 Rule Requirements 2.2.1 Part 1 Technical background is not considered necessary. 2.2.2 Part 2 Technical background is not considered necessary. 2.2.3 Application of the Rules Technical background is not considered necessary. 2.2.4 General criteria Technical background is not considered necessary. 2.3 Structural requirements 2.3.1 Materials and welding The rule requirements associated with the selection of materials for structural components are based on the location, design temperature, through thickness stress, and criticality of the component, see Sec 2, [3.4.4] and Ch 3, Sec 1. The rule requirements are based on the assumption that the material is manufactured in accordance with the rolling tolerances specified in IACS UR W13 (Rev 5, February 2012). 2.4 Ship parts 2.4.1 General Technical background is not considered necessary. 2.4.2 Fore part The structure in the forward part is defined as structure forward of the collision bulkhead in principle, but the scope of applicability of the structural regulations for slamming of the forward bottom and bow flare extends also to the structural parts aft of the collision bulkhead. To avoid duplication and for convenience, the regulations are included in those for the forward part. 2.4.3 Cargo area Technical background is not considered necessary. TECHNICAL BACKGROUND RULE REFERENCE PT 1, CH 1, SEC 1/PAGE 3 PT 1, CH 1, SEC 1 – APPLICATION COMMON STRUCTURAL RULES 2.4.4 Machinery space The pump room is included in machinery space for strength assessment purpose although SOLAS Ch II-1, Reg. 3.16, as amended; considers the pump room as part of the cargo area. The reference to SOLAS is given for information. 2.4.5 Aft part Technical background is not considered necessary. 2.4.6 Superstructures and deckhouses Technical background is not considered necessary. 2.5 Limits of application to lifting appliances 2.5.1 Definition This requirement specifies the fixed parts of lifting appliances considered as an integral part of the hull, to be checked under the CSR requirements. 2.5.2 Rule application for lifting appliances Technical background is not considered necessary. 2.5.3 Structures supporting fixed lifting appliances Technical background is not considered necessary. 2.6 Novel designs 2.6.1 Technical background is not considered necessary. 3 CLASS NOTATIONS 3.1 Class notation CSR 3.1.1 Application This requirement defines the class notation CSR. Ships complying with the requirements of these Rules will have the notation CSR placed in the ships public class. Mandatory or voluntary procedures which previously resulted in class notations that are made redundant by these Rules will no longer be applied to ships covered by the notation CSR. Additionally, current notations from the Societies that indicate compliance with specific guides or requirements that augment this standard will also be added to the ships public class records. 3.2 Class notation for bulk carriers 3.2.1 Additional service features BC-A, BC-B and BC-C This incorporates the requirements of IACS UR S25.3 (which is no longer in force). For improvement and transparency, the additional service feature {Block loading} is included when the ship is intended to operate in alternate block load condition. TECHNICAL BACKGROUND RULE REFERENCE PT 1, CH 1, SEC 1/PAGE 4 PT 1, CH 1, SEC 1 – APPLICATION COMMON STRUCTURAL RULES 3.2.2 Additional class notation GRAB [X] The External Advisory Group IACS used for consultation during harmonisation of CSR-BC and CSR-OT, advised that GRAB(20), the design basis in CSR-BC, is too low for larger vessels carrying iron ore and coal, compared to actual grabs used at terminals. The IACS Hull Panel followed up this feedback by collecting information on actual grab weight from owners association and IACS members and the following feedback were noted : Extract of information received Source (Grab weights refer to weight of empty grabss) Most heavy grabs are found in Rotterdam and are 37t . Class 1 Grabs with weight 22-28 t are quite common. Industry org.
Recommended publications
  • Regulatory Issues in International Martime Transport

    Regulatory Issues in International Martime Transport

    Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Economiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development __________________________________________________________________________________________ Or. Eng. DIRECTORATE FOR SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INDUSTRY DIVISION OF TRANSPORT REGULATORY ISSUES IN INTERNATIONAL MARTIME TRANSPORT Contact: Mr. Wolfgang Hübner, Head of the Division of Transport, DSTI, Tel: (33 1) 45 24 91 32 ; Fax: (33 1) 45 24 93 86 ; Internet: [email protected] Or. Eng. Or. Document complet disponible sur OLIS dans son format d’origine Complete document available on OLIS in its original format 1 Summary This report focuses on regulations governing international liner and bulk shipping. Both modes are closely linked to international trade, deriving from it their growth. Also, as a service industry to trade international shipping, which is by far the main mode of international transport of goods, has facilitated international trade and has contributed to its expansion. Total seaborne trade volume was estimated by UNCTAD to have reached 5330 million metric tons in 2000. The report discusses the web of regulatory measures that surround these two segments of the shipping industry, and which have a considerable impact on its performance. As well as reviewing administrative regulations to judge whether they meet their intended objectives efficiently and effectively, the report examines all those aspects of economic regulations that restrict entry, exit, pricing and normal commercial practices, including different forms of business organisation. However, those regulatory elements that cover competition policy as applied to liner shipping will be dealt with in a separate study to be undertaken by the OECD Secretariat Many measures that apply to maritime transport services are not part of a regulatory framework but constitute commercial practices of market operators.
  • Ims List Sanitation Compliance and Enforcement Ratings of Interstate Milk Shippers April 2017

    Ims List Sanitation Compliance and Enforcement Ratings of Interstate Milk Shippers April 2017

    IMS LIST SANITATION COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT RATINGS OF INTERSTATE MILK SHIPPERS APRIL 2017 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration Rules For Inclusion In The IMS List Interstate milk shippers who have been certified by State Milk sanitation authorities as having attained the milk sanitation compliance ratings are indicated in the following list. These ratings are based on compliance with the requirements of the USPHS/FDA Grade A Pasteurized Milk Ordinance and Grade A Condensed and Dry Milk Products and Condensed and Dry Whey and were made in accordance with the procedures set forth in Methods of Making Sanitation Rating of Milk Supplies. *Proposal 301 that was passed at 2001 NCIMS conference held May 5-10, 2001, in Wichita, Kansas and concurred with by FDA states: "Transfer Stations, Receiving Stations and Dairy Plants must achieve a sanitation compliance rating of 90 or better in order to be eligible for a listing in the IMS List. Sanitation compliance rating scores for Transfer and Receiving Stations and Dairy Plants will not be printed in the IMS List". Therefore, the publication of a sanitation compliance rating score for Transfer and Receiving Stations and Dairy Plants will not be printed in this edition of the IMS List. THIS LIST SUPERSEDES ALL LISTS WHICH HAVE BEEN ISSUED HERETOFORE ALL PRECEDING LISTS AND SUPPLEMENTS THERETO ARE VOID. The rules for inclusion in the list were formulated by the official representatives of those State milk sanitation agencies who have participated in the meetings of the National Conference of Interstate Milk Shipments.
  • Download/Dnvgl-Rp-G107-Efficient-Updating-Of-Risk-Assessments (Accessed on 5 April 2021)

    Download/Dnvgl-Rp-G107-Efficient-Updating-Of-Risk-Assessments (Accessed on 5 April 2021)

    applied sciences Article Determination of the Waterway Parameters as a Component of Safety Management System Andrzej B ˛ak 1,* and Paweł Zalewski 1 Faculty of Navigation, Maritime University of Szczecin, Wały Chrobrego St. 1-2, 70-500 Szczecin, Poland; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: This article presents the use of a computer application codenamed “NEPTUN” to ascertain the waterway parameters of the modernised Swinouj´scie–Szczecinwaterway.´ The designed program calculates the individual risks in selected sections of the fairway depending on the input data, including the parameters of the ship, available water area, and positioning methods. The collected data used for analyses in individual modules are stored in a SQL server of shared access. Vector electronic navigation charts of S-57 standard specification are used as the cartographic background. The width of the waterway is calculated by means of the method developed on the basis of the modified PIANC guidelines. The main goal of the research is to prove and demonstrate that the designed software would directly increase the navigation safety level of the Swinouj´scie–Szczecin´ fairway and indicate the optimal positioning methods in various navigation circumstances. Keywords: safety of navigation; safety management system; fairway; navigation channel; marine traffic engineering Citation: B ˛ak,A.; Zalewski, P. Determination of the Waterway Parameters as a Component of Safety 1. Introduction Management System. Appl. Sci. 2021, The aim of the work described in the paper was to build an application of the inte- 11, 4456. https://doi.org/10.3390/ app11104456 grated navigation safety management system (INSMS) for coastal waters and harbour approaches in order to easily estimate the risk level of a selected part of the waterway in Academic Editors: Peter Vidmar, predefined hydrometeorological and navigation conditions.
  • Seacare Authority Exemption

    Seacare Authority Exemption

    EXEMPTION 1—SCHEDULE 1 Official IMO Year of Ship Name Length Type Number Number Completion 1 GIANT LEAP 861091 13.30 2013 Yacht 1209 856291 35.11 1996 Barge 2 DREAM 860926 11.97 2007 Catamaran 2 ITCHY FEET 862427 12.58 2019 Catamaran 2 LITTLE MISSES 862893 11.55 2000 857725 30.75 1988 Passenger vessel 2001 852712 8702783 30.45 1986 Ferry 2ABREAST 859329 10.00 1990 Catamaran Pleasure Yacht 2GETHER II 859399 13.10 2008 Catamaran Pleasure Yacht 2-KAN 853537 16.10 1989 Launch 2ND HOME 856480 10.90 1996 Launch 2XS 859949 14.25 2002 Catamaran 34 SOUTH 857212 24.33 2002 Fishing 35 TONNER 861075 9714135 32.50 2014 Barge 38 SOUTH 861432 11.55 1999 Catamaran 55 NORD 860974 14.24 1990 Pleasure craft 79 199188 9.54 1935 Yacht 82 YACHT 860131 26.00 2004 Motor Yacht 83 862656 52.50 1999 Work Boat 84 862655 52.50 2000 Work Boat A BIT OF ATTITUDE 859982 16.20 2010 Yacht A COCONUT 862582 13.10 1988 Yacht A L ROBB 859526 23.95 2010 Ferry A MORNING SONG 862292 13.09 2003 Pleasure craft A P RECOVERY 857439 51.50 1977 Crane/derrick barge A QUOLL 856542 11.00 1998 Yacht A ROOM WITH A VIEW 855032 16.02 1994 Pleasure A SOJOURN 861968 15.32 2008 Pleasure craft A VOS SANTE 858856 13.00 2003 Catamaran Pleasure Yacht A Y BALAMARA 343939 9.91 1969 Yacht A.L.S.T. JAMAEKA PEARL 854831 15.24 1972 Yacht A.M.S. 1808 862294 54.86 2018 Barge A.M.S.
  • Stability Analysis Based on Theoretical Data and Inclining Test Results for a 1200 GT Coaster Vessel

    Stability Analysis Based on Theoretical Data and Inclining Test Results for a 1200 GT Coaster Vessel

    Proceeding of Marine Safety and Maritime Installation (MSMI 2018) Stability Analysis Based on Theoretical Data and Inclining Test Results for a 1200 GT Coaster Vessel Siti Rahayuningsih1,a,*, Eko B. Djatmiko1,b, Joswan J. Soedjono 1,c and Setyo Nugroho 2,d 1 Departement of Ocean Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya, Indonesia 2 Department of Marine Transportation Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya, Indonesia a. [email protected] *corresponding author Keywords: coaster vessel, final stability, preliminary stability. Abstract: 1200 GT Coaster Vessel is designed to mobilize the flow of goods and passengers in order to implement the Indonesian Sea Toll Program. This vessel is necessary to be analysed its stability to ensure the safety while in operation. The stability is analysed, firstly by theoretical approach (preliminary stability) and secondly, based on inclining test data to derive the final stability. The preliminary stability is analysed for the estimated LWT of 741.20 tons with LCG 23.797 m from AP and VCG 4.88 m above the keel. On the other hand, the inclining test results present the LWT of 831.90 tons with LCG 26.331 m from AP and VCG 4.513 m above the keel. Stability analysis on for both data is performed by considering the standard reference of IMO Instruments Resolution A. 749 (18) Amended by MSC.75 (69) Static stability, as well as guidance from Indonesian Bureau of Classification (BKI). Results of the analysis indicate that the ship meets the stability criteria from IMO and BKI. However results of preliminary stability analysis and final stability analysis exhibit a difference in the range 0.55% to 11.36%.
  • Etir Code Lists

    Etir Code Lists

    eTIR Code Lists Code lists CL01 Equipment size and type description code (UN/EDIFACT 8155) Code specifying the size and type of equipment. 1 Dime coated tank A tank coated with dime. 2 Epoxy coated tank A tank coated with epoxy. 6 Pressurized tank A tank capable of holding pressurized goods. 7 Refrigerated tank A tank capable of keeping goods refrigerated. 9 Stainless steel tank A tank made of stainless steel. 10 Nonworking reefer container 40 ft A 40 foot refrigerated container that is not actively controlling temperature of the product. 12 Europallet 80 x 120 cm. 13 Scandinavian pallet 100 x 120 cm. 14 Trailer Non self-propelled vehicle designed for the carriage of cargo so that it can be towed by a motor vehicle. 15 Nonworking reefer container 20 ft A 20 foot refrigerated container that is not actively controlling temperature of the product. 16 Exchangeable pallet Standard pallet exchangeable following international convention. 17 Semi-trailer Non self propelled vehicle without front wheels designed for the carriage of cargo and provided with a kingpin. 18 Tank container 20 feet A tank container with a length of 20 feet. 19 Tank container 30 feet A tank container with a length of 30 feet. 20 Tank container 40 feet A tank container with a length of 40 feet. 21 Container IC 20 feet A container owned by InterContainer, a European railway subsidiary, with a length of 20 feet. 22 Container IC 30 feet A container owned by InterContainer, a European railway subsidiary, with a length of 30 feet. 23 Container IC 40 feet A container owned by InterContainer, a European railway subsidiary, with a length of 40 feet.
  • 13.012 Hydrodynamics for Ocean Engineers Reading #3

    13.012 Hydrodynamics for Ocean Engineers Reading #3

    13.012 Hydrodynamics for Ocean Engineers Reading #3 13.012 Hydrodynamics for Ocean Engineers Prof. A.H. Techet Fall 2004 Archimedes’s Principle and Static Stability “Any object, wholly or partly immersed in a fluid, is buoyed up by a force equal to the weight of the fluid displaced by the object.” “The apparent loss in weight of a body immersed in a fluid is equal to the weight of the displaced fluid.” I. Archimedes’s Principle: The force on a body due to pressure alone (in the absence of viscous forces) K F = ∫∫ p nˆ ds (3.1) S where pressure is a function of depth below the free surface: p(z) = −ρgz . (3.2) K F = ∫∫ p nˆ ds = − ρg ∫∫ z nˆ ds (3.3) S S By Calculus the surface integral can be converted into a volume integral (Gauss’s Theorem/Divergence Theorem): K K ∫∫G ⋅ nˆ ds = ∫∫∫∇ ⋅G dV (3.4) SV Thus equation becomes: K FpndsgzndsgdVgVk==−=∫∫ˆˆρρρ ∫∫ ∫∫∫ =ˆ (3.5) SSV version 3.0 updated 9/8/2004 -1- ©2003, 2004 aht 13.012 Hydrodynamics for Ocean Engineers Reading #3 We can see now that the buoyancy force acts to counterbalance the displaced volume of fluid. For a half submerged body the area of the water plane must be accounted for in the integration. II. Moment on a body (Ideal Fluid) The moment on a submerged body follows directly from structural mechanics or dynamics methodologies. K K M = p(x × nˆ) ds ≡ (M ,M ,M ) = (M ,M ,M ) (3.6) ∫∫ 1 2 3 x y z S Figure 1: x, y, z coordinate reference frame.
  • Drawings Traced from Scans Located in the Maritime Administration Collection at the Museum of American History

    Drawings Traced from Scans Located in the Maritime Administration Collection at the Museum of American History

    HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD SAUGATUCK (AO-75) HAER No. VA-128 Location: James River Reserve Fleet, Newport News vicinity, Virginia Rig / Type of Craft: T2-SE-A1/Auxiliary Trade: Tanker Class: Suamico Hull No.: AO-75 Principal Dimensions: Length (oa): 523'-6" Beam: 68' Draft: 30' Displacement: 5,730 (lt) or 21,880 (fl) Gross tonnage: 10,448 tons Service speed: 15-½ knots (The listed dimensions are as built, but it should be noted that draft, displacement, and tonnages were subject to alteration over time as well as variations in measurement.) Dates of Construction: Keel laying: 20 August 1942 Launching: 7 December 1942 Delivery: 21 December 1942 Designer: U.S. Maritime Commission Builder: Sun Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company, Chester, Pennsylvania Present Owner: U.S. Maritime Administration Disposition: Scrapped in June 2006 Significance: Saugatuck is representative of the T2-SE-A1 tanker class, which became the workhorse for the U.S. Navy during World War II. There were 481 tankers constructed in this category under the U.S. Maritime Commission’s SAUGATUCK HAER No. VA-128 Page 2 Emergency Program between 1942 and 1945. These auxiliaries serviced the fleets engaged around the globe. Members of this class served in the U.S. Navy, Naval Transportation Service, and Military Sea Transportation Service—later Military Sealift Command. Historian: Brian Clayton, summer 2006 Project Information: This project is part of the Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), a long-range program to document historically significant engineering and industrial works in the United States. The Heritage Documentation Programs of the National Park Service, U.S.
  • Integrated Method for Optimal Channel Dredging Design 5

    Integrated Method for Optimal Channel Dredging Design 5

    Integrated Method for Optimal Channel Dredging Design 5 LUCAS SILVEIRA, GUSTAVO GOMES, LUANA TAIANI, VALDECÍLIO PINHEIRO, LINDINO BENEDET, ANDRE MARQUES AND CLAUDIO LOUREIRO INTEGRATED METHOD FOR OPTIMAL CHANNEL DREDGING DESIGN ABSTRACT OPEX. This in turn helps to identify the This configuration of the coastal environment optimal configuration for commercial interests favours the amplification of tidal astronomic This article has been adapted from the paper and internal rate of return (IRR) of the constituents inside the bays (tidal ranges up to that won the IADC Young Author 2016 terminal. 7m), generating strong tidal currents (up to Award and it was published in the 3 m/s) that pose serious hazards to navigation proceedings of IX PIANC-COPEDEC INTRODUCTION and force migration of seabed sand banks conference in October 2016. It is reprinted that cause channel shoaling. here with permission. The logistical constraints in central-southern Brazil and increasing agriculture production in MEARIM PORT An integrated analytical method was the central-northern areas of the country has Located about 45km inland inside the São developed and applied to identify the optimal given an impetus for the development of new Marcos Bay, the Mearim Port is a greenfield channel layout and dredging depth that greenfield port terminals in northern Brazil, port concept that is being studied and allowed for safe navigation; enabled the specifically in the states of Maranhão and designed over the past 8 years (Figure 1). operation of the required amount of ships per Pará. This is due to their strategic locations Initial studies of the port considered a 48km year; and at the same time reduced dredging that allow for cost-effective solutions to long navigation channel for 15m draft vessels, costs.
  • BULK CARRIERS: Design, Operation, and Maintenance Concerns for Structural Safety of Bulk Carriers

    BULK CARRIERS: Design, Operation, and Maintenance Concerns for Structural Safety of Bulk Carriers

    Member Agencies: Address Correspondence to: American Bureau of Shipping Executive Director Defence Research and Development Ship Structure Committee Canada U.S. Coast Guard (CG-5212/SSC) Maritime Administration 2100 Second Street, SW Military Sealift Command Washington, D.C. 20593-0001 Naval Sea Systems Command Website: Society of Naval Architects & Marine http://www.shipstructure.org Engineers Transport Canada United States Coast Guard Ship Structure Committee Case Study This case study has been prepared by the Ship Structure Committee (SSC) as an educational tool to advance the study of ship structures. The SSC is a maritime industry and allied agency partnership that supports, the active pursuit of research and development to identify gaps in knowledge for marine structures. The Committee was formed in 1943 to study Liberty Ship structural failures and now is comprised of 8 Principal Member Agencies. The Committee has established itself as a world recognized leader in marine structures with hundreds of technical reports, a global membership of over 900 volunteer subject matter experts, and a dynamic website to disseminate past, current, and future work of the Committee. We encourage you to review other case studies, reports, and material on ship structures available to the public online at www.shipistructure.org. BULK CARRIERS: Design, Operation, and Maintenance Concerns for Structural Safety of Bulk Carriers Date: Summary: The number and magnitude of bulk carrier accidents in the 1970s and 1980s gave rise to new consciousness, research and regulation of their design and operation. Unfortunately, this has not paid off in terms of either prevention of accidents or mitigation of damage to either life or property.
  • Basic Concepts of Maritime Transport and Its Present Status in Latin America and the Caribbean

    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.
  • An Investigation of Head-Sea Parametric Rolling and Its Influence on Container Lashing Systems

    An Investigation of Head-Sea Parametric Rolling and Its Influence on Container Lashing Systems

    SNAME Annual Meeting 2001 Presentation An Investigation of Head-Sea Parametric Rolling and its Influence on Container Lashing Systems William N. France,1 Marc Levadou,2 Thomas W. Treakle,3 J. Randolph Paulling,4 R. Keith Michel,5 and Colin Moore 5 Recent studies have demonstrated that parametric roll in extreme head or near head seas can occur when unfavorable tuning is combined with low roll damping (reduced speed) and large stability variations (governed by wavelength, wave height, general hull form, bow flare, and stern shapes). Parametric rolling is an unstable phenomenon, which can quickly generate large roll angles that are coupled with significant pitch motions. The rolling occurs in phase with pitch, and on containerships introduces high loads into the containers and their securing systems. It appears that post-Panamax containerships may be particularly prone to this behavior. This is an important issue considering the large number of these vessels scheduled for delivery in the next few years. In October, 1998, a post-Panamax, C11 class containership encountered extreme weather and sustained extensive loss and damage to deck stowed containers. The motions of the vessel during this storm event were investigated through a series of model tests and numerical analyses. These studies provide insight into the conditions in which post-Panamax containerships are likely to experience head sea parametric rolling, and the magnitude of motions and accelerations that can occur. The findings from this investigation are presented in this paper, together with discussion of how such extreme motions impact the design and application of container securing systems. Also outlined in the paper are recommendations for additional research needed to better understand the influence of vessel design and operational considerations on the propensity of post-Panamax containerships towards parametric rolling.