Structural Risk Model of Arctic Shipping

  • C. G. Daley
  • C. Ferregut
  • R. Brown
Conference paper
Part of the International Union of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics book series (IUTAM)


This paper discusses Arctic shipping risk analysis. A program of research was started in 1982 to develop a risk analysis model. A computer program, ASPEN (Arctic Shipping Probability Evaluation Network) has been the focal point of the research. The elements of the program mirror the elements of the problem. These include: environmental definition, the navigation and ice avoidance process (including human behaviour), ship/ice collision mechanics and structural limit states (failure mechanics). All aspects of the problem are variable and must be treated statistically. Related studies to obtain the statistical parameters are discussed. The numerical methods employed by the program are described. Many fundamental issues remain unsolved, particularly those related to correlated variables. The paper concludes with a discussion of required developments.


Collision Probability Damage Probability Hull Girder Floe Size Aspen Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Benjamin, J.R. and Cornell, C.A. 1970. Probability, Statistics and Decision for Civil Engineers. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  2. Bercha, F.G. 1979. The development and application of multi-model ice failure theory. IUTAM Symposium on Physics and Mechanics of Ice. Ed. P. Tryde, Copenhagen, pp. 16–27.Google Scholar
  3. Caldwell, J.B. 1965. Ultimate longitudinal strength. Transactions RINA, Vol. 107, pp. 411–430.Google Scholar
  4. Daidola, J.C. and Basar, N.S. 1980. Probability design for ship hull structural strength. Spring Meeting/STAR Symposium, SNAME, California, pp. 105–124.Google Scholar
  5. Daley, C.G. 1984. ASPEN, Arctic shipping probability evaluation network — group III studies. Report by Arctec Canada Limited 1305C to Coast Guard Northern.Google Scholar
  6. Daley, C. G. 1985. Studies in Connection with updating the Arctic shipping pollution prevention regulations group IV — further development of ship/ice collision probability model — ASPEN. Reported by Arctec Canada Limited to Coast Guard Northern, Transport Canada Report TP 6274E.Google Scholar
  7. Daley, C.G. and Ferregut, C. 1988. Strength and stability of framing for ice strengthening. Report by Fleet Technology Limited to Coast Guard Northern, Transport Canada, Report No. TP 9157E.Google Scholar
  8. Daley, C.G., St. John, J.W. and Seibold, F. 1984. Analysis of the extreme ice loads measured on the USCGC POLAR SEA. Transactions of SNAME, Vol. 92, pp. 241–252.Google Scholar
  9. Edwards, R.Y. et al. 1981. Results of full scale trials of the CCGS PIERRE RADISSON. STAR Symposium, Ottawa, pp. 291–310.Google Scholar
  10. Ferregut, C. and Daley, C.G. 1988. ASPEN — Structural modelling using limit states. Fleet Technology Report to Coast Guard Northern, Transport Canada Report TP 9472E.Google Scholar
  11. Ferregut, C., Perchanok, M. and Daley, C.G. 1987. Ship/ice collision probabilities in Arctic shipping. Port and Ocean Engineering Under Arctic Conditions, Vol. I, W.M. Sackinger and M.D. Jeffries (Eds.) University of Alaska, Fairbanks, pp. 631–643.Google Scholar
  12. Galamtos, T.V. and Ravindra, M.F. 1978. Properties of steel for use in LRPD. Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 104, No. 519, pp. 1459–1468.Google Scholar
  13. Ghoneim, G.A. 1983. KIGORIAK and ROBERT LEMEUR full scale impact tests for 1983. Final Report by Canadian Marine Drilling Limited to Coast Guard Northern. Government of Canada. 1972. Arctic shipping pollution prevention regulations. Canada Gazette, Part II, Vol. 106, No. 20.Google Scholar
  14. Hakala, M. and Riska, K. 1983. Results from statistical measuring system onboard MV ARCTIC 1982. Report by VTT to Canadian Coast Guard Northern.Google Scholar
  15. Hasofer, A.M. and Lind, N.C. 1974. An exact and invariant first-order reliability format. J. Engineering, Mech. Div., ASCE, Vol. 100, pp. 111–121.Google Scholar
  16. ISSC. 1985. Applied design. Report of Committee V. 2, Proceedings of the Ninth International Ship Structures Congress, Vol. 2, Genova, pp. 405–471.Google Scholar
  17. Kennedy, D.J.L. and Baker, K.A. 1984. Resistance factors for steel highway bridges. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 324–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kennedy, D.J.L. and Gadaly, M.M.A. 1980. Limit states design of steel structures — performance factors. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 7, pp. 45 – 77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kheisin, D.E. 1972. Use of probability methods in estimating the manoeuvering qualities of ships in ice. Publ. in Ice Navigation Qualitites of Ships, Ed. by Kheisin and Popov, CRREL Translation 417, pp. 40–58.Google Scholar
  20. Kheisin, D.E., Likhomanov, Y.A. and Kurdyumov, V.A. 1973. Determination of specific breaking energy and contact pressures produced by the impact of a solid against ice. Symposium on Physical Methods of Studying Snow and Ice, Leningrad, Translation by CRREL No. TL539, pp. 210–219.Google Scholar
  21. Kudishkin, Y.S. 1972. On the distribution of probabilities of the number of impacts of ship’s hull against the ice. Publ. in Ice Navigation Qualities of Ships, Ed. by Kheisin and Popov, CRREL Translation 417. pp. 136–141.Google Scholar
  22. Noble, P. and Menon, B. 1981. Laboratory investigation of ice impact pressure. Report 450 by Arctec Canada to Canadian Coast Guard Northern.Google Scholar
  23. Perchanok, M.S., Ferregut, C. and Brow, R. 1989. A probabilistic ice information system for Canadian waterways. Marine Technology Society Journal, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 28–32.Google Scholar
  24. Perchanok, M.S., Wells, D.G. Lowings, M.G. 1986. Merchant ship ice navigation studies in the Canadian Arctic. Intl. Polar Transportation Conference, Vancouver, pp. 859–857.Google Scholar
  25. Rackwitz, R. and Fiessler, B. 1978. Structural reliability under combined random load sequences. Computers and Structures, Pergamon Press, Vol. 9, pp. 489–494.MATHGoogle Scholar
  26. Ratzlaff, K.P. and Kennedy, D. J.L. 1986. Behaviour and ultimate strength of continuous steel plates subjected to uniform transverse loads. Can. Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 76–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tam, G. 1980. Development of an ice extrusion model — interim report in task 4 of group I studies for update of ASPPR. Report IR 586A by Arctec Canada Limited to Canadian Coast Guard.Google Scholar
  28. Varsta, P. 1977. Measurement and analysis of ice induced stresses in the shell of an icebreaker. Helsinki Winter Navigation Research Board, Report 21.Google Scholar
  29. Voelker, R.P. et al. 1981. Evaluating commercial Arctic marine transportation with polar class icebreakers. STAR Symposium Ottawa, pp. 145–158.Google Scholar
  30. Vuorio, J. et al. 1979. Long term measurements of ice pressure and ice-induced stresses on the icebreaker SISU in winter 1978. Helsinki Winter Navigation Research Board, Report 28.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. G. Daley
    • 1
  • C. Ferregut
    • 2
  • R. Brown
    • 1
  1. 1.Fleet Technology LimitedKanataCanada
  2. 2.Dept. of Civil EngineeringUniversity of Texas at El PasoEl PasoUSA

Personalised recommendations