Advertisement

Parametric ship design and optimisation of cargo vessels for efficiency and safe operation in adverse weather conditions

  • Aphrodite Kanellopoulou
  • Ageliki Kytariolou
  • Apostolos Papanikolaou
  • Vladimir Shigunov
  • George ZaraphonitisEmail author
Original article
  • 13 Downloads

Abstract

A ship needs to be optimized for cost-effectiveness, operational efficiency, improved safety, comfort of passengers and crew, and for minimum environmental impact. Many of these requirements are contradicting and a decision regarding the optimal ship design needs to be made, based as far as possible on rational criteria and procedures. This is the case for the problem which the SHOPERA project is dealing with. Environmental concern was the reason behind the introduction of the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) a few years ago. One way of fulfilling the demanding requirements of the EEDI regulation is to reduce speed of future ships. This may result, however, in under-powered designs, raising questions regarding the ability of these designs to operate safely in adverse weather conditions. The present paper focuses on the development of an optimisation procedure for the design of tankers and bulk carriers, to identify designs with adequate powering to ensure safe operation in adverse weather conditions, while keeping the right balance between economy, efficiency and safety of the ship and the environment.

Keywords

EEDI Manoeuvring Optimisation Ship design 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The work presented in this paper is partly supported by the Collaborative Project SHOPERA (Energy Efficient Safe SHip OPERAtion), Grant agreement number 605221, co-funded by the Research DG of the European Commission within the RTD activities of the FP7 Thematic Priority Transport, FP7-SST-2013-RTD-1, Activity 7.2.4 Improving Safety and Security, SST.2013.4-1: Ships in Operation. The European Community and the authors shall not in any way be liable or responsible for the use of any knowledge, information or data of the present paper, or of the consequences thereof. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the European Community.

References

  1. 1.
    UNCTAD Review of Maritime Transport (2016) UNCTAD/RMT/2016, United nations publication. Sales no. E.16.II.D.7, ISBN 978-92-1-112904-5, eISBN: 978-92-1-058462-3, ISSN 0566-7682Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Smith TWP, Jalkanen JP, Anderson BA, Corbett JJ, Faber J, Hanayama S, O’Keeffe E, Parker S, Johansson L, Aldous L, Raucci C, Traut M, Ettinger S, Nelissen D, Lee DS, Ng S, Agrawal A, Winebrake JJ, Hoen M, Chesworth S, Pandey A (2015) Third IMO GHG Study 2014, International Maritime Organization (IMO) London, UKGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    IMO Resolution MEPC.212(63) (2012) Guidelines on the Method of Calculation of the Attained Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for New Ships. International Maritime Organization, The Marine Environment Protection CommitteeGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    IMO Resolution MEPC.245(66) (2014) Guidelines on the Method of Calculation of the Attained Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for New Ships. International Maritime Organization, The Marine Environment Protection CommitteeGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    IMO MEPC 64/4/13 (2012) Consideration of the Energy Efficiency Design Index for new ships—minimum propulsion power to maintain the manoeuvrability in adverse conditions, submitted by IACS, BIMCO, INTERCARGO, INTERTANKO and OCIMFGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    IMO MEPC 64/INF.7 (2012) Background Information to Document MEPC 64/4/13, submitted by the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    IMO MEPC 62/5/19 (2011) Reduction of GHG emissions from ships—consideration of the Energy Efficiency Design Index for new ships. Minimum propulsion power to ensure safe manoeuvring in adverse conditions, submitted by IACS, BIMCO, CESA, INTERCARGO, INTERTANKO, WSCGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    IMO MEPC 62/INF.21 (2011) Reduction of GHG emissions from ships—consideration of the Energy Efficiency Design Index for new ships. Minimum propulsion power to ensure safe manoeuvring in adverse conditions, submitted by IACS, BIMCO, CESA, INTERCARGO, INTERTANKO, WSCGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    IMO-MSC 93/21/5 and MSC 93/INF.13 (2014) Safety evaluation of the interim guidelines for determining minimum propulsion power to maintain the manoeuvrability of ships under adverse weather conditions, submitted by GreeceGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    IMO MEPC 67/4/16 (2014) Comments on documents MSC 93/21/5 and MSC 93/INF.13 and consideration on the requirement of minimum propulsion power needed to maintain manoeuvrability of a ship in adverse conditions, submitted by Denmark, Japan and the Republic of KoreaGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    IMO MEPC 67/INF.14 (2014) EU Project “Energy Efficient Safe SHip OPERAtion” (SHOPERA), submitted by Germany, Norway and the United Kingdom, 2014Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    IMO MEPC 67/INF.22 (2014) Japanese activity on “Minimum Propulsion to Maintain the Manoeuvrability of Ships in Adverse Conditions”, submitted by JapanGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    IMO MSC-MEPC.2/Circ.11 (2012) Interim guidelines for determining minimum propulsion power to maintain the manoeuvrability of ships in adverse conditionsGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    IMO Res. MEPC.232(65) (2013) 2013 Interim guidelines for determining minimum propulsion power to maintain the manoeuvrability of ships in adverse conditions. MEPC 65/22, Annex 16Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    IMO MEPC 70/INF.33 (2016) Results of the research project “Energy Efficient Safe Ship Operation” (SHOPERA) Submitted by Denmark, Germany, Norway and SpainGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    IMO MEPC 70/5/20 (2016) Progress report of SHOPERA and Japan’s projects and outline of draft revised Guidelines for determining minimum propulsion power to maintain the manoeuvrability of ships in adverse conditions, submitted by Denmark, Germany and JapanGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    IMO MEPC 70/INF.30 (2016) Supplementary information on the draft revised Guidelines for determining minimum propulsion power to maintain the manoeuvrability of ships in adverse conditions, submitted by Denmark, Germany and JapanGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    IMO Res. MSC.137(76) (2002) Standards for ship manoeuvrability. MSC 76/23/Add.1Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Papanikolaou A, Zaraphonitis G, Bitner-Gregersen E, Shigunov V, Moctar E, Soares OGuedes, Reddy C, Sprenger DN (2015) Energy efficient safe ship operation (SHOPERA). In: Proc. 4th World Maritime Technology Conference (WMTC 2015), Soc. of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (SNAME), Providence Rhode Island, 3–7 November 2015Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shigunov V, Papanikolaou A (2014) Criteria for minimum powering and manoeuvrability in adverse weather conditions. In: 14th International Ship Stability Workshop (ISSW 2014), Kuala Lumpur, MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shigunov V, Papanikolaou A (2015) Criteria for minimum powering and manoeuvrability in adverse weather conditions. Ship Technol Res Schiffstechnik 62(3):140–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    IMO МЕРС 71/INF.28 (2017) Draft revised guidelines for determining minimum propulsion power to maintain the manoeuvrability of ships in adverse conditions. Paper submitted by Denmark, Germany, Japan, Spain and IACSGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Söding H, Shigunov V (2015) Added resistance of ships in waves. Ship Technol Res Schiffstechnik 62(1):2–13  CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Brix JE (1993) Manoeuvring technical manual. Seehafen Verlag, HamburgGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zaraphonitis G, Kanellopoulou A, Papanikolaou A, Shigunov V (2016) Ship optimisation for efficiency and manoeuvrability in adverse sea conditions. In: 6th International Maritime Conference on Design for Safety, Germany, HamburgGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    NAPA Software, NAPA Oy. https://www.napa.fi/
  27. 27.
    CAESES Software, Friendship systems. https://www.caeses.com/
  28. 28.
    Holtrop J (1984) A statistical re-analysis of resistance and propulsion data. Int Shipbuild Prog 31(363):272–276Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Resolution A.749(18) (1993) Code on intact stability for all types of ships covered by IMO instruments. International Maritime Organization, Assembly, 18th session, 23 Nov 1993Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    IMO, International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    IMO, International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    OECD Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry (2007) Compensated Gross Ton (CGT) System. Council working party on shipbuilding. http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=C/WP6(2006)7&docLanguage=En
  33. 33.
    Ventikos NP, Koimtzoglou A, Louzis K, Eliopoulou E (2014) Statistics for marine accidents in adverse weather conditions. In: 2nd International Conference on Maritime Technology and Engineering, MARTECH 2014, Lisbon, Portugal, 15–17 October 2014Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers (JASNAOE) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ship Design Laboratory, School of Naval Architecture and Marine EngineeringNational Technical University of AthensAthensGreece
  2. 2.DNV GL SEHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations