DOCSLIB.ORG

Estimation Methods for Basic Ship Design Summary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Estimation Methods for Basic Ship Design Prof. Manuel Ventura Ship Design I MSc in Marine Engineering and Naval Architecture Summary • Hull Form • Lightship Weight • Deadweight Components • Propulsive Coefficients • Propulsive Power • Subdivision and Compartments • Capacities M.Ventura Estimation Methods 2 1 Introduction • At the beginning of the basic design there is no sufficient data to proceed with accurate computations • It is necessary to use estimate methods which with the few information available or assumed will allow to obtain approximate values • These methods are generally based in statistical regressions with data compiled from existing ships M.Ventura Estimation Methods 3 Hull Form Coefficients 2 Block Coefficient (CB) C = 1.08 (single screw) CC= −⋅1.68 F B n C = 1.09 (twin screw) C = 1.06 L + 20 0.14 B CB =⋅ Fn 26 0.48≤ CB ≤ 0.85 0.14≤ Fn ≤ 0.32 L + 20 0.23 B CB =⋅2 3 26 Fn 3 CFFFB = −+⋅−⋅+⋅4.22 27.8nnn 39.1 46.6 0.15< Fn < 0.32 Barras (2004) ⎛⎞V V [knots] C =−⋅1.20 0.39 B ⎜⎟ ⎝⎠LPP LPP [m] M.Ventura Estimation Methods 5 Block Coefficient (Cb) Alexander (1962) CKBf=−05. VL with: K= 1.12 » 1.03 p/ navios mercantes = 1.32 » 1.23 p/ navios de guerra V: velocidade[] knots LF : comprimento da linha de flutuaçao[] ft Van Lameren CVLBf=−137.. 202 M.Ventura Estimation Methods 6 3 Block Coefficient (Cb) Ayre CVLBf=−106.. 168 Minorsky CVLBf=−122.. 238 Munro-Smith (1964) dC Cw− Cb B = dT T M.Ventura Estimation Methods 7 Block Coefficient (Cb) Townsin (1979) −1 CB = 0.7 + 0.125 ⋅ tg [25 ⋅ (0.23 − Fn)] Schneekluth (1987) L 0.14 PP + 20 C = ⋅ B B Fn 26 L PP + 20 p / 0.48 < C < 0.85 0.23 B B CB = 2 ⋅ Fn 3 26 0.14 < Fn < 0.32 M.Ventura Estimation Methods 8 4 Block Coefficient (Cb) Katsoulis 0.42 −0.3072 0.1721 −0.6135 CB = 0.8217 ⋅ f ⋅ LPP ⋅ B ⋅T ⋅V In which f is a function of the type of ship: Ro/Ro Gen. Cargo Containers OBO Bulk Gas Products Ferry Reefers Tankers Chemicals 0.97 0.99 1.00 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.09 Kerlen (1970) CB =1.179 − 2.026 ⋅ Fn p / CB > 0.78 M.Ventura Estimation Methods 9 Midship Section Coefficient (CM) Midship Section Coefficient R2 C =−1 M 2.33⋅⋅BT Kerlen (1970) Where: −3.56 CM =1.006 − 0.0056 ⋅ CB R= Bilge radius [m] Fn = Froude Number HSVA 1 CM = 3.5 1+ ()1− CB Meizoso 0.792 RO/RO ships and Container-Carriers CM =1 − 0.062 ⋅ Fn M.Ventura Estimation Methods 10 5 Midship Section Coefficient (CM) Parson (2003) ⎛ 0.4292⋅ R2 ⎞ CM = 1− ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ B ⋅T ⎠ M.Ventura Estimation Methods 11 Waterline Area Coefficient (CWL) Schneekluth 3 U shape sections CWL = 0.95⋅CP + 0.17 ⋅ 1− CP 1 C = ()1+ 2 ⋅C Intermediate shape sections WL 3 B V shape sections CWL = CB − 0.025 1 ⎛ C ⎞ C = ⎜1+ 2 ⋅ B ⎟ WL 3 ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ CM ⎠ AG= 0.248+⋅ 0.049 Torroja BG=−⋅0.778 0.035 G= 0sec U shaped tions CWL = A + B ⋅CB = 1secV shaped tions M.Ventura Estimation Methods 12 6 Waterline Area Coefficient (CWL) Parson (2003) CB CWL = 0.471+ 0.551⋅CB M.Ventura Estimation Methods 13 Buoyancy Center Ordinate (KB) ⎛⎞51CB KB=− T ⎜⎟ Normand ⎝⎠63CWP KBT=−(0.9 0.36 CM ) Normand KBT=−⋅−⋅(0.9 0.3 CM 0.1 CB ) Schneekluth ⎛⎞CB KB=− T ⎜⎟0.78 0.285 Wobig ⎝⎠CWP ⎛⎞0.168⋅ CWL KB=−⎜⎟0.372 ⋅ T Vlasov ⎝⎠C B M.Ventura Estimation Methods 14 7 Buoyancy Center Abscissa (LCB) As a first approximation, the abscissa of the buoyancy center can be obtained from the following diagram as a function of the Block Coefficient (CB): A - recommended values B, C – limit values M.Ventura Estimation Methods 15 Buoyancy Center Abscissa (LCB) Schneekluth [% Lpp AV MS] lcb=−⋅()8.80 38.9 Fn /100 lcb=−0.135 + 0.194 ⋅ CP (tankers and bulkers) M.Ventura Estimation Methods 16 8 Transverse Metacentric Radius (BMT) The Transverse Metacentric Radius is defined by I BMT = XX ∇ The transverse moment of inertia of the waterplane (IXX) can be approximated by the expression: 3 IkBLXX=⋅⋅ r In which the values of the factor kr are obtained from the following Table: CWL Kr CWL Kr CWL Kr 0.68 0.0411 0.78 0.0529 0.88 0.0662 0.70 0.0433 0.80 0.0555 0.90 0.0690 0.72 0.0456 0.82 0.0580 0.92 0.0718 0.74 0.0480 0.84 0.0607 0.94 0.7460 M.Ventura0.76 Estimation0.0504 Methods0.86 0.0634 0.96 0.7740 17 Transverse Metacentric Radius (BMT) fC( ) ⋅⋅ LB3 fC( ) B2 BMT ==⋅WP WP 12⋅ LBTC⋅⋅⋅B 12 TC ⋅B Reduction Factor: fC( WP) =⋅1.5 C WP − 0.5 Murray 2 f (CCWP) =+⋅0.096 0.89 WP Normand 3 fC()WP=⋅⋅+0.0372 ( 2 C WP 1 ) Bauer 2 N.N. f (CCWP) =⋅1.04 WP 2 Dudszus and Danckwardt fC( WP) =⋅+⋅±0.13 C WP 0.87 C WP 0.005 M.Ventura Estimation Methods 18 9 Transverse Metacentric Radius (BMT) Xuebin (2009) B2 BMT = ()0.085⋅CB − 0.002 ⋅ (bulk-carriers) T ⋅CB Xuebin, Li (2009), “Multiobjective Optimization and Multiattribute Decision Making Study of Ship’s Principal Parameters in Conceptual Design”, Journal of Ship Research, Vol.53, No.2, pp.83-02. M.Ventura Estimation Methods 19 Longitudinal Metacentric Radius The Longitudinal Metacentric Radius is defined by I BML = YY ∇ The longitudinal moment of inertia of the waterplane (IYY) can be obtained approximately by the expression: 3 IkBLYY=⋅⋅ R In which the values of the factor kR are obtained from the following Table: CWL Kr CWL Kr CWL Kr 0.68 0.0332 0.78 0.0450 0.88 0.0588 0.70 0.0350 0.80 0.0475 0.90 0.0616 0.72 0.0375 0.82 0.0503 0.92 0.0645 0.74 0.0400 0.84 0.0532 0.94 0.0675 0.76 0.0425 0.86 0.0560 0.96 0.0710 M.Ventura Estimation Methods 20 10 Stability Parameters Metacentric Height KM ⎛⎞23 CCBB⎛⎞ ⎛⎞ C B KM=⋅ B ⎜⎟13.61 − 45.4 + 52.17⎜⎟ − 19.88 ⎜⎟ ⎜⎟CC C ⎝⎠WP⎝⎠ WP ⎝⎠ WP Applicable to ships with 0.73 < (CB/CWP ) < 0.95 ⎛⎞0.08B 0.9−⋅ 0.3CC −⋅ 0.1 KM=⋅ B⎜⎟ ⋅⋅+ C MB Schneekluth ⎜⎟C T B ⎝⎠M T If CWP is unknown: 1 ⎛⎞C C =+⋅⎜⎟12 B C = 1.0 WP, N 3 ⎜⎟ ⎝⎠CM M.Ventura Estimation Methods 21 Period of Roll • An excessively high value of GMT implies a very small period of roll and leads to high accelerations, which are uncomfortable to crew and passengers and also results into higher loads in some equipment • A maximum value of GMT should therefore be assumed based on na acceptable value of the roll period (T = 10 seconds is typical value) • The period of roll (T) can be estimated by the expression: 0.43⋅ B T = R GMT [s] where: B [m] GMT [m] M.Ventura Estimation Methods 22 11 Wetted Surface (SW) Denny em que: ∇ SW : wetted surface [ft2] SLTWPP=⋅⋅+1.7 LPP : length bet. perpendiculars [ft] T T: draught[ft] ∇ : displacement volume [ft3] Taylor ScLWWL=⋅⋅∇⋅0.17 em que: SW : surface [m2] ∇ : displacement volume [ m3] LPP : length on the waterline [m] c: f(CM, B/T) M.Ventura Estimation Methods 23 Wetted Surface (SW) Holtrop and Mennen (1978) SLwlTBCWM=⋅⋅+⋅⋅(2 ) 0.453+⋅−⋅−⋅+⋅+ 0.4425CC 0.2862 0.003467B 0.369 C ()BMT WP A 2.38⋅ BT CB In which: ABT – transverse section area of the bulb on FWD PP Schneekluss and Bertram (1998) 11 SL=⋅∇+⋅⋅∇3.433 0.5 WWL( ) M.Ventura Estimation Methods 24 12 Cylindrical Mid-Body Lindblad (1961) L E =−⋅1.975 2.27 C p/ Cb < 0.75 L B L R =−1.12 C L B Le = length of entry LLLLXER=− − Lr = length of run Lx = length of parallel body Lindblad, Anders F. (1961), “On the Design of Lines for Merchant Ships” , Chalmers University Books. M.Ventura Estimation Methods 25 Cylindrical Mid-Body Approximate extent of the cylindrical body: • Full shape (CB > 0.80) LX = 30% ≈ 35% LPP • Full shape (0.70 ≤ CB ≤ 0.80) LX = 15% ≈ 20% LPP • Slender shape (CB < 0.70) LX decreasing to 0 In alternative, the length of the cylindrical body (LX) and the proportion between the entry and the run bodies (L1/L2) can be obtained from the graphic of the figure, as a function of the block coefficient (CB) M.Ventura Estimation Methods 26 13 Freeboard Tabular Freeboard (ILLC) • The tabular freeboard can be approximated by a parabolic curve regression of the tabular values from the Load Lines Convention as follows – Ships of Type A: 2 FB=−0.027415 × Lfb + 21.007881 × Lfb − 562.067149 [mm] – Ships of Type B: 2 FB=−0.016944 × Lfb + 22.803499 × Lfb − 691.269920 [mm] where Lfb = ship length according to the rules [m] M.Ventura Estimation Methods 28 14 Tonnage Gross Tonnage • The Gross Tonnage can be estimated as a function of the Cubic Number (CN = Lpp x B x D), by the following expression: GT= k⋅ CN Type of Ship K Tanker, Bulk Carrier 0.26 – 0.30 Product Tanker, Chemical Tanker 0.25 – 0.35 Multi-Purpose 0.25 – 0.40 Fast Container Carrier 0.25 – 0.33 M.Ventura Estimation Methods 30 15 Net Tonnage • The Net Tonnage can be estimated as a fraction of the Gross Tonnage, as follows: NT= k⋅ GT Type of Ship K Container Carrier 0.3 – 0.5 Others 0.5 – 0.7 M.Ventura Estimation Methods 31 Compensated Gross Tonnage (1) • Compensated Gross Tonnage (CGT) is related to the amount of work required to build a ship and it depends on her size, as measured by the GT, and her sophistication, as defined by a coefficient increasing with the ship type complexity.
Recommended publications
  • Eskola Juho Makinen Jarno.Pdf (1.217Mt)

    Eskola Juho Makinen Jarno.Pdf (1.217Mt)

    Juho Eskola Jarno Mäkinen MERENKULKIJA Merenkulun koulutusohjelma Merikapteenin suuntautumisvaihtoehto 2014 MERENKULKIJA Eskola, Juho Mäkinen, Jarno Satakunnan ammattikorkeakoulu Merenkulun koulutusohjelma Merikapteenin suuntautumisvaihtoehto Toukokuu 2014 Ohjaaja: Teränen, Jarmo Sivumäärä: 126 Liitteitä: 3 Asiasanat: historia, komentosilta, slangi ja englanti, lastinkäsittely ja laivateoria, Meriteidensäännöt ja sopimukset, yleistä merenkulusta. ____________________________________________________________________ Opinnäytetyömme aiheena oli luoda merenkulun tietopeli, joka sai myöhemmin nimekseen Merenkulkija. Työmme sisältää 1200 sanallista kysymystä, ja 78 kuvakysymystä. Kysymysten lisäksi teimme pelille ohjeet ja pelilaudan, jotta Merenkulkija olisi mahdollisimman valmis ja ymmärrettävä pelattavaksi. Pelin sanalliset kysymykset on jaettu kuuteen aihealueeseen. Aihealueita ovat: historia, komentosilta, slangi ja englanti, lastinkäsittely ja laivateoria, meriteidensäännöit, lait ja sopimukset ja viimeisenä yleistä merenkulusta. Kuvakysymykset ovat sekalaisia. Merenkulkija- tietopeli on suunnattu merenkulun opiskelijoille, tarkemmin kansipuolen päällystöopiskelijoille. Toki kokeneemmillekin merenkulkijoille peli tarjoaa varmasti uutta tietoa ja palauttaa jo unohdettuja asioita mieleen. Merenkulkija- tietopeli soveltuu oppitunneille opetuskäyttöön, ja vapaa-ajan viihdepeliksi. MARINER Eskola, Juho Mäkinen, Jarno Satakunnan ammattikorkeakoulu, Satakunta University of Applied Sciences Degree Programme in maritime management May 2014 Supervisor:
  • In This Issue …

    In This Issue …

    In This Issue … INLAND SEAS®VOLUME 72 WINTER 2016 NUMBER 4 MAUMEE VALLEY COMES HOME . 290 by Christopher H. Gillcrist KEEPING IT IN TRIM: BALLAST AND GREAT LAKES SHIPPING . 292 by Matthew Daley, Grand Valley State University Jeffrey L. Ram, Wayne State University RUNNING OUT OF STEAM, NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS FROM THE SS HERBERT C. JACKSON . 319 by Patrick D. Lapinski NATIONAL RECREATION AREAS AND THE CREATION OF PICTURED ROCKS NATIONAL LAKESHORE . 344 by Kathy S. Mason BOOKS . 354 GREAT LAKES NEWS . 356 by Greg Rudnick MUSEUM COLUMN . 374 by Carrie Sowden 289 KEEPING IT IN TRIM: BALLAST AND GREAT LAKES SHIPPING by Matthew Daley, Grand Valley State University Jeffrey L. Ram, Wayne State University n the morning of July 24, 1915, hundreds of employees of the West- Oern Electric Company and their families boarded the passenger steamship Eastland for a day trip to Michigan City, Indiana. Built in 1903, this twin screw, steel hulled steamship was considered a fast boat on her regular run. Yet throughout her service life, her design revealed a series of problems with stability. Additionally, changes such as more lifeboats in the aftermath of the Titanic disaster, repositioning of engines, and alterations to her upper cabins, made these built-in issues far worse. These failings would come to a disastrous head at the dock on the Chicago River. With over 2,500 passengers aboard, the ship heeled back and forth as the chief engineer struggled to control the ship’s stability and failed. At 7:30 a.m., the Eastland heeled to port, coming to rest on the river bottom, trapping pas- sengers inside the hull and throwing many more into the river.
  • Malacca-Max the Ul Timate Container Carrier

    Malacca-Max the Ul Timate Container Carrier

    MALACCA-MAX THE UL TIMATE CONTAINER CARRIER Design innovation in container shipping 2443 625 8 Bibliotheek TU Delft . IIIII I IIII III III II II III 1111 I I11111 C 0003815611 DELFT MARINE TECHNOLOGY SERIES 1 . Analysis of the Containership Charter Market 1983-1992 2 . Innovation in Forest Products Shipping 3. Innovation in Shortsea Shipping: Self-Ioading and Unloading Ship systems 4. Nederlandse Maritieme Sektor: Economische Structuur en Betekenis 5. Innovation in Chemical Shipping: Port and Slops Management 6. Multimodal Shortsea shipping 7. De Toekomst van de Nederlandse Zeevaartsector: Economische Impact Studie (EIS) en Beleidsanalyse 8. Innovatie in de Containerbinnenvaart: Geautomatiseerd Overslagsysteem 9. Analysis of the Panamax bulk Carrier Charter Market 1989-1994: In relation to the Design Characteristics 10. Analysis of the Competitive Position of Short Sea Shipping: Development of Policy Measures 11. Design Innovation in Shipping 12. Shipping 13. Shipping Industry Structure 14. Malacca-max: The Ultimate Container Carrier For more information about these publications, see : http://www-mt.wbmt.tudelft.nl/rederijkunde/index.htm MALACCA-MAX THE ULTIMATE CONTAINER CARRIER Niko Wijnolst Marco Scholtens Frans Waals DELFT UNIVERSITY PRESS 1999 Published and distributed by: Delft University Press P.O. Box 98 2600 MG Delft The Netherlands Tel: +31-15-2783254 Fax: +31-15-2781661 E-mail: [email protected] CIP-DATA KONINKLIJKE BIBLIOTHEEK, Tp1X Niko Wijnolst, Marco Scholtens, Frans Waals Shipping Industry Structure/Wijnolst, N.; Scholtens, M; Waals, F.A .J . Delft: Delft University Press. - 111. Lit. ISBN 90-407-1947-0 NUGI834 Keywords: Container ship, Design innovation, Suez Canal Copyright <tl 1999 by N. Wijnolst, M .
  • 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.
  • 380 FT Towing Tank Justification

    380 FT Towing Tank Justification

    UNITED STATES NAVAL ACADEMY Annapolis, Maryland-21402 IN REPLY REFER TO: '7-2-69. From: Superintendent, U. S. Naval Academy To: Chief of Naval Personnel Subj: High Performance Towing Tank Ref: (a) NavPe~s ltr Pers-C322-jk of $ Octo~~r 196$ (b) COMNAVFACENGCOM memo of 1$ September 196$ (c) ENGR DEPT (USNA) INST 11000.2 of 30 June 196$ (d) ENGR DEPT (USNA) Rep'ort E-6$-5 "The Conceptual Design of a High Performance Towing Tank for the U. S ·i Na val Academy," 25 June 196$ . ( e ) "Just!ification for a Hydrodynamics Laboratory at the u. S. Naval Academy," 9 September 1968 I Encl: (1) Speci'fic Justification of a High Performance Towing Tank for the U. S. Naval Academy (2) Procurement of Equipment for a High Performance Towin;g Tank for th.e U. S. Naval Academy ( 3 ) Abst~act of Reference ( d) . 1. References (~) and (b) request further and specific justification fo,r construction of a high performance towing tank in the proposed new Engineering Department building. This justification is found in Enclosure (1). References (c) and (d) desdribe the proposed laboratory, and the required deve·lopment and design work. Enclosure ( 2) outlines possible means of reducing initial development . costs and procur,ing the required equipment. · Enclosure (3) abstracts refere,nce ( d) describing the tank and its equipm~nt. I . I . 2. Although cle~rly recognizing a critical need to save funds, it is my !conviction .that the proposed high perform­ ance towing tank is justified and must be included _in the proposed. new building.
  • International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969

    International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969

    No. 21264 MULTILATERAL International Convention on tonnage measurement of ships, 1969 (with annexes, official translations of the Convention in the Russian and Spanish languages and Final Act of the Conference). Concluded at London on 23 June 1969 Authentic texts: English and French. Authentic texts of the Final Act: English, French, Russian and Spanish. Registered by the International Maritime Organization on 28 September 1982. MULTILAT RAL Convention internationale de 1969 sur le jaugeage des navires (avec annexes, traductions officielles de la Convention en russe et en espagnol et Acte final de la Conf rence). Conclue Londres le 23 juin 1969 Textes authentiques : anglais et fran ais. Textes authentiques de l©Acte final: anglais, fran ais, russe et espagnol. Enregistr e par l©Organisation maritime internationale le 28 septembre 1982. Vol. 1291, 1-21264 4_____ United Nations — Treaty Series Nations Unies — Recueil des TVait s 1982 INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION © ON TONNAGE MEASURE MENT OF SHIPS, 1969 The Contracting Governments, Desiring to establish uniform principles and rules with respect to the determination of tonnage of ships engaged on international voyages; Considering that this end may best be achieved by the conclusion of a Convention; Have agreed as follows: Article 1. GENERAL OBLIGATION UNDER THE CONVENTION The Contracting Governments undertake to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention and the annexes hereto which shall constitute an integral part of the present Convention. Every reference to the present Convention constitutes at the same time a reference to the annexes. Article 2. DEFINITIONS For the purpose of the present Convention, unless expressly provided otherwise: (1) "Regulations" means the Regulations annexed to the present Convention; (2) "Administration" means the Government of the State whose flag the ship is flying; (3) "International voyage" means a sea voyage from a country to which the present Convention applies to a port outside such country, or conversely.
  • 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.
  • Potential for Terrorist Nuclear Attack Using Oil Tankers

    Potential for Terrorist Nuclear Attack Using Oil Tankers

    Order Code RS21997 December 7, 2004 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Port and Maritime Security: Potential for Terrorist Nuclear Attack Using Oil Tankers Jonathan Medalia Specialist in National Defense Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Summary While much attention has been focused on threats to maritime security posed by cargo container ships, terrorists could also attempt to use oil tankers to stage an attack. If they were able to place an atomic bomb in a tanker and detonate it in a U.S. port, they would cause massive destruction and might halt crude oil shipments worldwide for some time. Detecting a bomb in a tanker would be difficult. Congress may consider various options to address this threat. This report will be updated as needed. Introduction The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, heightened interest in port and maritime security.1 Much of this interest has focused on cargo container ships because of concern that terrorists could use containers to transport weapons into the United States, yet only a small fraction of the millions of cargo containers entering the country each year is inspected. Some observers fear that a container-borne atomic bomb detonated in a U.S. port could wreak economic as well as physical havoc. Robert Bonner, the head of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has argued that such an attack would lead to a halt to container traffic worldwide for some time, bringing the world economy to its knees. Stephen Flynn, a retired Coast Guard commander and an expert on maritime security at the Council on Foreign Relations, holds a similar view.2 While container ships accounted for 30.5% of vessel calls to U.S.
  • International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969

    International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969

    Page 1 of 47 Lloyd’s Register Rulefinder 2005 – Version 9.4 Tonnage - International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969 Tonnage - International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969 Copyright 2005 Lloyd's Register or International Maritime Organization. All rights reserved. Lloyd's Register, its affiliates and subsidiaries and their respective officers, employees or agents are, individually and collectively, referred to in this clause as the 'Lloyd's Register Group'. The Lloyd's Register Group assumes no responsibility and shall not be liable to any person for any loss, damage or expense caused by reliance on the information or advice in this document or howsoever provided, unless that person has signed a contract with the relevant Lloyd's Register Group entity for the provision of this information or advice and in that case any responsibility or liability is exclusively on the terms and conditions set out in that contract. file://C:\Documents and Settings\M.Ventura\Local Settings\Temp\~hh4CFD.htm 2009-09-22 Page 2 of 47 Lloyd’s Register Rulefinder 2005 – Version 9.4 Tonnage - International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969 - Articles of the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships Articles of the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships Copyright 2005 Lloyd's Register or International Maritime Organization. All rights reserved. Lloyd's Register, its affiliates and subsidiaries and their respective officers, employees or agents are, individually and collectively, referred to in this clause as the 'Lloyd's Register Group'. The Lloyd's Register Group assumes no responsibility and shall not be liable to any person for any loss, damage or expense caused by reliance on the information or advice in this document or howsoever provided, unless that person has signed a contract with the relevant Lloyd's Register Group entity for the provision of this information or advice and in that case any responsibility or liability is exclusively on the terms and conditions set out in that contract.
  • Shipbuilding

    Shipbuilding

    Shipbuilding A promising rst half, an uncertain second one 2018 started briskly in the wake of 2017. In the rst half of the year, newbuilding orders were placed at a rate of about 10m dwt per month. However the pace dropped in the second half, as owners grappled with a rise in newbuilding prices and growing uncertainty over the IMO 2020 deadline. Regardless, newbuilding orders rose to 95.5m dwt in 2018 versus 83.1m dwt in 2017. Demand for bulkers, container carriers and specialised ships increased, while for tankers it receded, re ecting low freight rates and poor sentiment. Thanks to this additional demand, shipbuilders succeeded in raising newbuilding prices by about 10%. This enabled them to pass on some of the additional building costs resulting from higher steel prices, new regulations and increased pressure from marine suppliers, who have also been struggling since 2008. VIIKKI LNG-fuelled forest product carrier, 25,600 dwt (B.Delta 25), built in 2018 by China’s Jinling for Finland’s ESL Shipping. 5 Orders Million dwt 300 250 200 150 100 50 SHIPBUILDING SHIPBUILDING KEY POINTS OF 2018 KEY POINTS OF 2018 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Deliveries vs demolitions Fleet evolution Deliveries Demolitions Fleet KEY POINTS OF 2018 Summary 2017 2018 Million dwt Million dwt Million dwt Million dwt Ships 1,000 1,245 Orders 200 2,000 m dwt 83.1 95.5 180 The three Asian shipbuilding giants, representing almost 95% of the global 1,800 orderbook by deadweight, continued to ght ercely for market share.
  • 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%.